From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (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 E9CF342DA43; Wed, 8 Jul 2026 16:18:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783527494; cv=none; b=nn3VymO4OQGR1Zo6FHdiRVsptXXSiAWqXbpsWUIK9+WwYPecZQ1uLaoep/VVHUYBuZlRp19Ycym6C4JGoUpNzTqVhM1cHzmD+M3daJcFAqCqXceJVhTzolgHbb5e5N0QgwW++A2cwwSNE+jMOzQ5VA5lCfE9ZsRNEdtMf+IWpko= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783527494; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jNsVCa9sTInE6can+kIbi2s5bzi8FEA3QkWcregF/jo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=FJ9D2SbB7sy+8BPHfv1+7LYczTqM+G2gaD1dPS0215aDxKLfRgQTszs89agvkkRS9xmlN5rCNb80uohSo85OP7aSgorKVIiyAvVSrkKUEvj6P2D3HdMrTh38e7K7sArnXnhvXmfFqsAxFep1Jir7VkZ4cgbz+Wi+FJFJpvYHgfk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=j5Y/+nm7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="j5Y/+nm7" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2D25E1F00A3A; Wed, 8 Jul 2026 16:18:11 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1783527492; bh=y752DrbBFFJ8XerVisGtOLzv8nsy5PhYRKi3Iy7oc5I=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=j5Y/+nm76DxQqxVQ2O+uA2O29guRVqRiECEnMndzrX6O1QnnGoIxp2bjapqLS2BHu jVJFtqTe3UugvZNfBbhiRRNC2C5dzNv78ys6CYuC1x7c3La4ymr/QOU9C1SC/ELw9C UtxVp80PMuvpJqW6zgM8iKoa0pRA8QDTVTmAmj4MuUy9sbe6S0HRJapHaQq1eCSqkQ vITo2wO/XYgiIIlxI3nq5Q/sKSYW/K7QydMN4dv/+K9ad5hrS2QHakeJLErVlgknES fagUYCD9M7NlJr1Cdn2xNEudUV4lb+ZY7JRq5CF2pLt/IRAMNRAagZOz01v0W0Jr2A N7vZ4ppo4339g== From: Sasha Levin To: stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Cc: Sasha Levin , jiayuan.chen@shopee.com, jiayuan.chen@linux.dev, yingfu.zhou@shopee.com, willy@infradead.org, Andrew Morton , Huang Ying , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15.y 6.1.y 6.6.y 1/1] mm/vmscan: flush deferred TLB before freeing large folios Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2026 12:18:00 -0400 Message-ID: <20260708120502.agent5-0002@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.53.0 In-Reply-To: <20260708041237.289026-2-jiayuan.chen@linux.dev> References: <20260708041237.289026-2-jiayuan.chen@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On Wed, Jul 08, 2026 at 12:12:36PM +0800, Jiayuan Chen wrote: > Flush the deferred batch before freeing a large folio inline, the same way > the order-0 path already waits for the flush. Queued for 6.6 and 6.1 with Matthew's Reviewed-by added, thanks. > destroy_compound_page was recently renamed to destroy_large_folio. > So it would be conflict when this patch was applied to 5.15/6.1 It actually applied cleanly to the current 6.1.y (that tree already uses folio_test_large()/destroy_large_folio() there), but it does not apply to 5.15.y, which is still page-based (PageTransHuge()/destroy_compound_page()). Could you send a tested per-branch version for 5.15.y? 5.10.y has the identical vulnerable code shape, so a 5.10.y version would be welcome as well. -- Thanks, Sasha