[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190812143731.3f46b952e53ff3434e04bcf9@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2019 14:37:31 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org>
Cc: Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>, Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@...cle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ltp@...ts.linux.it,
Li Wang <liwang@...hat.com>,
Naoya Horiguchi <n-horiguchi@...jp.nec.com>,
Cyril Hrubis <chrubis@...e.cz>, xishi.qiuxishi@...baba-inc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: fix hugetlb page migration/fault race
causing SIGBUS
On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 11:33:26 -0400 Sasha Levin <sashal@...nel.org> wrote:
> >I thought that absence of the Cc is the indication :P. Anyway, I really
> >do not understand why should we bother, really. I have tried to explain
> >that stable maintainers should follow Cc: stable because we bother to
> >consider that part and we are quite good at not forgetting (Thanks
> >Andrew for persistence). Sasha has told me that MM will be blacklisted
> >from automagic selection procedure.
>
> I'll add mm/ to the ignore list for AUTOSEL patches.
Thanks, I'm OK with that. I'll undo Fixes-no-stable.
Although I'd prefer that "akpm" was ignored, rather than "./mm/".
Plenty of "mm" patches don't touch mm/, such as drivers/base/memory.c,
include/linux/blah, fs/, etc. And I am diligent about considering
-stable for all the other code I look after.
This doesn't mean that I'm correct all the time, by any means - I'd
like to hear about patches which autosel thinks should be backported
but which don't include the c:stable tag.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists