From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 285497A for ; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 05:24:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 697EBC340E7; Sat, 12 Feb 2022 05:24:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1644643481; bh=uEDAhcRzsKIbuXy+ThKnGGt3zbBE61T6oJdwQm2QIa0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=UXXWPbTYZiIBrZ+2sX42s2jsYvKEFidIJ8x0EU2Ta+IsjY0skCdhTn8/5KC2Ee81e XUA0PmG2xUpKLS2AEvMBUpbcaJA9B4ft3cjc0xUAnipR0xR2/l6KiNtco4To/ZwBFf xke1oIh6uQVmZLabkox12Q9cwnyN/iZN/e0tloYM= Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2022 21:24:40 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Linux-MM , mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: incoming Message-Id: <20220211212440.7fc283e731d05d5ce33dfd43@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: References: <20220211162756.9f8e8baef81183041ccfc16f@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 18:02:53 -0800 Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 4:27 PM Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > 5 patches, based on f1baf68e1383f6ed93eb9cff2866d46562607a43. > > So this *completely* flummoxed 'b4', because you first sent the wrong > series, and then sent the right one in the same thread. > > I fetched the emails manually, but honestly, this was confusing even > then, with two "[PATCH x/5]" series where the only way to tell the > right one was basically by date of email. They did arrive in the same > order in my mailbox, but even that wouldn't have been guaranteed if > there had been some mailer delays somewhere.. Yes, I wondered. Sorry bout that. > So next time when you mess up, resend it all as a completely new > series and completely new threading - so with a new header email too. > Please? Wilco. > And since I'm here, let me just verify that yes, the series you > actually want me to apply is this one (as described by the head > email): > > Subject: [patch 1/5] fs/binfmt_elf: fix PT_LOAD p_align values .. > Subject: [patch 2/5] fs/proc: task_mmu.c: don't read mapcount f.. > Subject: [patch 3/5] mm: vmscan: remove deadlock due to throttl.. > Subject: [patch 4/5] mm: memcg: synchronize objcg lists with a .. > Subject: [patch 5/5] kfence: make test case compatible with run.. > > and not the other one with GUP patches? Those are the ones. Five fixes, three with cc:stable.