Re: [PATCH v2 06/13] KVM: VMX: Use higher-level allocator

["Brendan Jackman" <brendan.jackman@linux.dev>]

On Wed Jun 24, 2026 at 4:14 PM UTC, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 5:29 PM Yosry Ahmed <yosry@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 04:04:20PM -0700, Sean Christopherson wrote:
>> > On Mon, Jun 22, 2026, Brendan Jackman wrote:
>> > > On Mon Jun 22, 2026 at 10:10 AM UTC, sashiko-bot wrote:
>> > > > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
>> > > > - [Medium] The commit message incorrectly states that `__alloc_pages_node()` allows passing `NUMA_NO_NODE`, while the opposite is true.
>> > > > --
>> > > >
>> > > > commit 7bd439c242125db27305b61b14c9972fb028282a
>> > > > Author: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
>> > > >
>> > > > KVM: VMX: Use higher-level allocator
>> >
>> > While you're dealing with nits, can you massage the shortlog to something like:
>> >
>> >   KVM: VMX: Use no-underscores API when allocating pages for a specific NUMA node
>> >
>> > "Use higher-level allocator" is extremely vague, and arguably misleading because
>> > the "allocator" being used isn't changing.  Which is kinda the point: *nothing*
>> > is changing in practice.
>>
>> Maybe "higher-level allocator API"?
>>
>> no-underscores is just.. meh :P
>
> It's overall a good idea to add "No functional change intended" at the
> end of the changelog in all these cleanup patches.

Oh yeah good point, I'm adding that for each of these "remove the __"
ones and some others.

I'm skipping it for the ones that are trivially identifiable as such
(e.g. "move function to a different file" and "delete unused function"),
but let me know if you think I should just add this note everywhere
instead.