Re: [PATCH 3/4] mm: vrealloc: properly document __GFP_ZERO behavior

[Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>]

On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 02:19:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 20:49:43 +0200 Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org> wrote:
> 
> > Properly document that if __GFP_ZERO logic is requested, callers must
> > ensure that, starting with the initial memory allocation, every
> > subsequent call to this API for the same memory allocation is flagged
> > with __GFP_ZERO. Otherwise, it is possible that __GFP_ZERO is not fully
> > honored by this API.
> 
> I appear to have just seen this, in a separate mailing.

What you have seen in a separate mail is a similar patch for krealloc() [1].
This one is a fixup for vrealloc() from a previous submission you've applied to
mm-unstable.

> 
> Please, slow down.  We have two months.  Await reviewer feedback, spend
> time over those changelogs, value clarity and accuracy and completeness
> over hastiness.  The only reason for rushing things is if a patch is
> disrupting ongoing testing of the linux-next tree.

There was a discussion in [2], which lead to this fixup series.

In terms of changelogs this series is indeed a bit "lax", since I have
recognized that you queue up fixup patches for changes that did already land in
mm-unstable to be squashed into the original commits later on.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240730194214.31483-1-dakr@kernel.org/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240722163111.4766-1-dakr@kernel.org/T/#m065a7f875b44dc945dd535c2b7168c3d77a98993