From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-189.mta1.migadu.com (out-189.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.189]) (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 87FA33A4F47 for ; Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:21:55 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.189 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782123716; cv=none; b=SEvsDbNqoA3QVTYKOeJOD4ScvW2xT7Y54vu0WTRIYHVvNyPegwCtVfWQttAexmFjFI8mYYWNRGAkbLYeO+nwgCUVz4qt2mMt6U9NvupFXUJH1oVWqGwRJE4M1fQNdZwW7v1PmvEYI7sjjj8uclwOqVNLdH47luXLqSGBsVeVdTI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1782123716; c=relaxed/simple; bh=V36N5qqTK871HGmVbyRrv3qGLBId8ErFaP2QKthJkZs=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Cc:Subject:From:To: References:In-Reply-To; b=Z0tFEnI3w2klM0wfWzr0weqrrAB3LQDYL/oWnNheqAydechbkEhMBPg9oWJC237euZt/QpXoS8Zx8DD+6wE3AhV4yaptjYfgEYK6T0VNGrkm5Fhv0xOXtaJTcsGP3pS45j+7W5MqXxcsoHN9Ubhpi7WvHMrd0jXu0sVwCbTfGfI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=AB1vYXDf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.189 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="AB1vYXDf" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1782123713; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=V36N5qqTK871HGmVbyRrv3qGLBId8ErFaP2QKthJkZs=; b=AB1vYXDf/UiXtxGrnGPRghKQiJYVCLUt6wcsjNkwxOm4gj1O0DUTcHuk+arNX5KrypiXwG aiGeHbofiEpJV/qmI0XglPUntPxViVk5FmgISyiQDSRTTnzeiQ4lVx/r+xUz1ZVvOgoIrc +Wzeap8md9knZmv7G0wnhUV3G3aHItY= Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2026 10:21:47 +0000 Message-Id: Cc: , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 06/13] KVM: VMX: Use higher-level allocator X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: "Brendan Jackman" To: , "Brendan Jackman" References: <20260622-alloc-trylock-v2-0-31f31367d420@google.com> <20260622-alloc-trylock-v2-6-31f31367d420@google.com> <20260622101056.4120C1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20260622101056.4120C1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On Mon Jun 22, 2026 at 10:10 AM UTC, sashiko-bot wrote: > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issu= e(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 > > KVM: VMX: Use higher-level allocator > > This commit switches the allocation function used in alloc_vmcs_cpu() > from __alloc_pages_node() to alloc_pages_node(). > >> KVM: VMX: Use higher-level allocator >> >> The difference between __alloc_pages_node() and alloc_pages_node() is >> that the former allows you to pass NUMA_NO_NODE. > > [Severity: Medium] > Is this description inverted? > > Looking at include/linux/gfp.h, it appears __alloc_pages_node() explicitl= y > forbids NUMA_NO_NODE (-1) via VM_BUG_ON(nid < 0). > > Instead, it is alloc_pages_node() that handles NUMA_NO_NODE by explicitly > checking for it and falling back to numa_mem_id(). > > While the code change itself is safe, the justification reverses the > behavior of the two APIs. Could the commit message be updated to > accurately reflect the API semantics? Repeating myself[0] as this patch has a different CC list from the others: Sashiko is correct, the commit message says "former" but it should say "latter". [0] https://lore.kernel.org/all/DJFI39RWHV1O.MMMMMZSK8E8C@linux.dev/