linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 00/16] hugetlb and vmalloc fixes and perf improvements

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: <b0a6ccd0-205d-42d8-9b98-6efb34c117e4@arm.com>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 11:59:33 +0000
From: Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
 Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
 Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
 Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
 Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
 Anshuman Khandual <anshuman.khandual@....com>, Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>,
 Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@...osinc.com>,
 Steve Capper <steve.capper@...aro.org>, Kevin Brodsky
 <kevin.brodsky@....com>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/16] hugetlb and vmalloc fixes and perf improvements

On 06/02/2025 07:52, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed,  5 Feb 2025 15:09:40 +0000 Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com> wrote:
> 
>>  I'm guessing that going in
>> through the arm64 tree is the right approach here?
> 
> Seems that way, just from the line counts.
> 
> I suggest two series - one for the four cc:stable patches and one for
> the 6.14 material.  This depends on whether the ARM maintainers want to
> get patches 1-4 into the -stable stream before the 6.14 release.

Thanks Andrew, I'm happy to take this approach assuming Catalin/Will agree.

But to be pedantic for a moment, I nominated patches 1-3 and 13 as candidates
for stable. 1-3 should definitely go via arm64. 13 is a pure mm fix. But later
arm64 patches in the series depend on it being fixed. So I wouldn't want to put
13 in through mm tree if it means 14-16 will be in the arm64 tree without the
fix for a while.

Anyway, 13 doesn't depend on anything before it in the series so I can gather
the fixes in to a series of 4 as you suggest. Then the improvements become a
series of 12. And both can go via arm64?

I'll gather review comments then re-post as 2 series for v2; assuming
Will/Catalin are happy.

Thanks,
Ryan