From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (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 784F91AB6F1 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 10:16:57 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756721819; cv=none; b=nOUiBoNqsfWvGwJTVumybfzBfH9arMpkCHVcBYI7HuoK2DSHbU1TJz9S/uRQ8HyP+cG38CmR6b8ITtlgUu1xFcVZgzg1zzLgb4R7xa6T5moNY9wZdu/b36n4nGCPvhdZH56VHhdSZtIVZ/hl3SkYyA8aX4W55Nw7utS9QOu6TCQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756721819; c=relaxed/simple; bh=B+1DlquKVk41/r6dL0vQTw41mvBrVwTTFhUlbS0w+mE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=hpgK+Hyg7SEr8hQ28uRZfWkiNqHnZe7h3c7IQ4pF870PZWhNfgC2C/Fy+Z8k5g/o31RlK4oWyTV62aXhzxS7eNPgl/QsqPzJX04Ip/BmhSL2bGSAGefVEiRKntdmUOdWYLlMKXKheRPjiq6dPCepO4r34lLYMEgKj1PngQ/JHnA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=IbU3qXOj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="IbU3qXOj" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1756721816; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=B+1DlquKVk41/r6dL0vQTw41mvBrVwTTFhUlbS0w+mE=; b=IbU3qXOjMNuQXg098SDhGf/d1Y1Di1LrrA+LKcJ85KobDKjLhTY9dMg+HT8keSmz3DR+y4 SyFaiMoB5hFa/TgG+9+lrJS7tJZ/QMVvknrLNFFMW+tYtLJJ9jRTWsCn/7aHOepZssq179 ZatZHWC0hh+Ft7g6R858539+xu1rMzQ= Received: from mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-611-vz1nJLrVNeWLtfTda_JN2g-1; Mon, 01 Sep 2025 06:16:53 -0400 X-MC-Unique: vz1nJLrVNeWLtfTda_JN2g-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: vz1nJLrVNeWLtfTda_JN2g_1756721812 Received: from mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-06.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96AA0180028D; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 10:16:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (unknown [10.72.112.127]) by mx-prod-int-01.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 61B0530001A2; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 10:16:50 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 18:16:41 +0800 From: Baoquan He To: "Uladzislau Rezki (Sony)" Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Andrew Morton , Michal Hocko , LKML , stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc, mm/kasan: respect gfp mask in kasan_populate_vmalloc() Message-ID: References: <20250831121058.92971-1-urezki@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20250831121058.92971-1-urezki@gmail.com> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.4.1 on 10.30.177.4 Hi Uladzislau, On 08/31/25 at 02:10pm, Uladzislau Rezki (Sony) wrote: > kasan_populate_vmalloc() and its helpers ignore the caller's gfp_mask > and always allocate memory using the hardcoded GFP_KERNEL flag. This > makes them inconsistent with vmalloc(), which was recently extended to > support GFP_NOFS and GFP_NOIO allocations. Is this patch on top of your patchset "[PATCH 0/8] __vmalloc() and no-block support"? Or it is a replacement of "[PATCH 5/8] mm/kasan, mm/vmalloc: Respect GFP flags in kasan_populate_vmalloc()" in the patchset? I may not get their relationship clearly. Thanks Baoquan