linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm/nommu: remove unnecessary VMA locking

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <787e7d9a-fcf4-ad5f-97f1-c0e1c1553c2d@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Mar 2023 10:05:49 +0100
From:   David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>
To:     Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, michel@...pinasse.org,
        jglisse@...gle.com, mhocko@...e.com, vbabka@...e.cz,
        hannes@...xchg.org, mgorman@...hsingularity.net, dave@...olabs.net,
        willy@...radead.org, liam.howlett@...cle.com, peterz@...radead.org,
        ldufour@...ux.ibm.com, paulmck@...nel.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        will@...nel.org, luto@...nel.org, songliubraving@...com,
        peterx@...hat.com, dhowells@...hat.com, hughd@...gle.com,
        bigeasy@...utronix.de, kent.overstreet@...ux.dev,
        punit.agrawal@...edance.com, lstoakes@...il.com,
        peterjung1337@...il.com, rientjes@...gle.com, chriscli@...gle.com,
        axelrasmussen@...gle.com, joelaf@...gle.com, minchan@...gle.com,
        rppt@...nel.org, jannh@...gle.com, shakeelb@...gle.com,
        tatashin@...gle.com, edumazet@...gle.com, gthelen@...gle.com,
        gurua@...gle.com, arjunroy@...gle.com, soheil@...gle.com,
        leewalsh@...gle.com, posk@...gle.com,
        michalechner92@...glemail.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, x86@...nel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...roid.com,
        Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mm/nommu: remove unnecessary VMA locking

>>
>> Just a general comment: usually, if review of the original series is
>> still going on, it makes a lot more sense to raise such things in the
>> original series so the author can fixup while things are still in
>> mm-unstable. Once the series is in mm-stable, it's a different story. In
>> that case, it is usually good to have the mail subjects be something
>> like  "[PATCH mm-stable 1/1] ...".
> 
> Ok... For my education, do you mean the title of this patch should
> somehow reflect that it should be folded into the original patch? Just
> trying to understand the actionable item here. How would you change
> this patch when posting for mm-unstable and for mm-stable?

For patches that fixup something in mm-stable (stable commit ID but not 
yet master -> we cannot squash anymore so we need separate commits), 
it's good to include "mm-stable". The main difference to patches that 
target master is that by indicating "mm-stable", everyone knows that 
this is not broken in some upstream/production kernel.

For patches that fixup something that is in mm-unstable (no stable 
commit ID -> still under review and fixup easily possible), IMHO we 
distinguish between two cases:

(1) You fixup your own patches: simply send the fixup as reply to the 
original patch. Andrew will pick it up and squash it before including it 
in mm-stable. Sometimes a complete resend of a series makes sense instead.

(2) You fixup patches from someone else: simply raise it as a review 
comment in reply to the original patch. It might make sense to send a 
patch, but usually you just raise the issue to the patch author as a 
review comment and the author will address that. Again, Andrew will pick 
it up and squash it before moving it to mm-stable.

That way, it's clearer when stumbling over patches on the mailing list 
if they fix a real issue in upstream, fix a issue in 
soon-to-be-upstream, or are simply part of a WIP series that is still 
under review.

-- 
Thanks,

David / dhildenb