From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-182.mta0.migadu.com (out-182.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.182]) (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 2016B3C552C for ; Thu, 23 Apr 2026 12:48:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.182 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776948492; cv=none; b=Kcx3NKiYf6AUhTNlmiX5MjiVHCeLxIiGbiHbur/6t12L48eD72VzwwBIkEJMUuSi2i9z53TQItUrdpPAIvAJUTdPoQgMl9BkKsyzhL/kOEW7iUCYRJHQpBsSN/gajMQwBjuTzIkmZePKbbLQtMCNGwPJEMgYKeGwwEnWvw+1mrs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776948492; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6dB/511NzYDa/Ssq3s7417rdrbdEff5n3zxZbJO3gWY=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Message-Id:References:To; b=lAA6dWCkcEhDThSiVbzP/IjcQiN8/EzZcSdjTzvIeUcHyk6vIelHQgVonbLz1d9h0gF+hXn24euEvjK7joEQOwSuD/qqD3i7HPld4Yk2BZoaqQB8ndWMMMHWtAoBksy4rvra9Kgk1V4C3fIIlhFY4JJ/maYZthFdW/iQNm6Q8kI= 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=eCIMj6Zf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=91.218.175.182 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="eCIMj6Zf" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1776948488; 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=mzyqTkwD3Tq3eWJj43nY/4NCn6uElngPKF2N7BctSd4=; b=eCIMj6ZffdfaEQ/eCdUmx55xZEnSNjMOWnXKRPikt4j4906Q1SttxKiVjKU8rlNbvJpCby erUQIBtSxfqPziAXNQuEfEecz4uegx50F+rqJgqHbsujB4xw/yqILQ/i2jg0Vq6Ad0Vpcj qd6Rxnai0Y+qvbwrtDxUe9CV+iyEcm4= Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3864.500.181\)) Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 v5 4/6] mm/sparse-vmemmap: Fix DAX vmemmap accounting with optimization X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Muchun Song In-Reply-To: <20260423053237.a44b68034673bb35a1e042cd@linux-foundation.org> Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 20:43:02 +0800 Cc: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" , Muchun Song , Oscar Salvador , Michael Ellerman , Madhavan Srinivasan , Lorenzo Stoakes , "Liam R . Howlett" , Vlastimil Babka , Mike Rapoport , Suren Baghdasaryan , Michal Hocko , Nicholas Piggin , Christophe Leroy , aneesh.kumar@linux.ibm.com, joao.m.martins@oracle.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20260423071911.1962859-1-songmuchun@bytedance.com> <20260423071911.1962859-5-songmuchun@bytedance.com> <1cbae635-a115-4270-bae2-64145d16f936@kernel.org> <1ADE7CE5-F02D-42B2-B7AC-FE0D6E86042D@linux.dev> <20260423053237.a44b68034673bb35a1e042cd@linux-foundation.org> To: Andrew Morton X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT > On Apr 23, 2026, at 20:32, Andrew Morton = wrote: >=20 > On Thu, 23 Apr 2026 20:04:21 +0800 Muchun Song = wrote: >=20 >> Ah, looks like I need to update the patch to fix this. >=20 > OK. Please have a think about which patches we should backport into > -stable. Possibly all 6! And the timing of this backport. In theory, I think all of these require backporting, and each carries a = certain level of potential impact. >=20 > Ideally, split the series up into one series for 7.1-rcX+stable, = another > series for 7.2.rc1. Given that these issues have existed for a long time and the trigger frequency is very low, I suggest we take a more conservative timing. We can prioritize getting the series into 7.2-rc1 first. Once they have 'baked' in the mainline for a while without issues, we can then proceed with the backport to -stable (7.1.x). This avoids rushing risky changes into stable branches. Thanks, Muchun