[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <dcaba52e-7af0-4a36-b2f9-dfc2f83a4e10@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2025 21:18:18 +0100
From: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@...nel.org>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>
Cc: "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@...nel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@...gle.com>, Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
oliver.sang@...el.com, linux-mm@...ck.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm: avoid use of BIT() macro for initialising VMA flags
On 12/5/25 21:15, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Dec 2025 17:50:37 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com> wrote:
>
>> Commit 2b6a3f061f11 ("mm: declare VMA flags by bit") significantly changed
>>
>> ...
>>
>> Andrew - note I've referenced the linux-next commit number above, could you
>> replace with the upstream commit hash once your PR is taken? Thanks!
>
> That's in mm-stable so the hash shouldn't be changing.
>
>
> I'm not really sure what's the best way to determine this. I use
>
> hp2:/usr/src/mm> git tag --contains 2b6a3f061f11
> mm-everything-2025-11-29-19-43
> mm-everything-2025-12-01-19-02
> mm-everything-2025-12-03-23-49
> mm-everything-2025-12-05-00-55
> mm-stable-2025-12-03-21-26
I asked myself the same question a couple of times.
Maybe this?
$ git branch -r --contains 2b6a3f061f11
mm/mm-everything
mm/mm-new
mm/mm-stable
--
Cheers
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists