From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FB2ECDB483 for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 16:34:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229940AbjJRQe3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Oct 2023 12:34:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57624 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229853AbjJRQe1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Oct 2023 12:34:27 -0400 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DAD95BD for ; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 09:34:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2F75FC433C9; Wed, 18 Oct 2023 16:34:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2023 17:34:21 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Andrew Morton Cc: Liu Shixin , Patrick Wang , Kefeng Wang , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] mm: kmemleak: use mem_pool_free() to free object Message-ID: References: <20231018102952.3339837-1-liushixin2@huawei.com> <20231018102952.3339837-6-liushixin2@huawei.com> <20231018092253.a12815afa7db9049f95fc195@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20231018092253.a12815afa7db9049f95fc195@linux-foundation.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 18, 2023 at 09:22:53AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 16:57:50 +0100 Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > Could you please reorder this patch before the previous one? If you > > > added a Fixes tag, we may want a cc stable as well (as for the other > > > patches with a Fixes tag) and it makes more sense to backport it on its > > > own without the __create_object() split. Otherwise: > > > > Ah, ignore this. If we want a cc stable, the whole thing needs > > backporting, including the split which is essential for the subsequent > > fix. > > Do we want a cc:stable? That tag wasn't originally included. > > If so, all seven patches? > > If "not all seven" then can we please have two series, one for the > backport patches, one for next merge window. I think we need all 7 if we are to backport them. But we don't need to cc stable explicitly, we can send them to stable@kernel.org separately once tested on those stable versions. So, for the mm tree, don't bother with cc stable. -- Catalin