linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND v3 0/4] mm/hugetlb: fixes for PMD table sharing (incl. using mmu

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20260115125324.6373966518a479c585c4f404@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2026 12:53:24 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@...nel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-mm@...ck.org, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>, "Aneesh Kumar K.V"
 <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Peter Zijlstra
 <peterz@...radead.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Muchun Song
 <muchun.song@...ux.dev>, Oscar Salvador <osalvador@...e.de>,
 "Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, Vlastimil Babka
 <vbabka@...e.cz>, Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Pedro Falcato
 <pfalcato@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>, Harry Yoo
 <harry.yoo@...cle.com>, Laurence Oberman <loberman@...hat.com>, Prakash
 Sangappa <prakash.sangappa@...cle.com>, Nadav Amit <nadav.amit@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND v3 0/4] mm/hugetlb: fixes for PMD table sharing
 (incl. using mmu_gather)

On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 20:40:13 +0100 "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@...nel.org> wrote:

> On 1/15/26 19:05, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Thu, 15 Jan 2026 17:22:30 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> Any update on this series? It's a hotfix series and I don't see it queued
> >> up anywhere in either mm-hotfixes-unstable or mm-hotfixes-stable, this
> >> issue is causing ongoing problems for a lot of people, is there any reason
> >> it's being delayed?
> >>
> >> It's received extensive approval and testing, so should be GTG right?
> > 
> > This has been in mm-unstable for a long time.  As the series had a
> > mixture of cc:stable and not-cc:stable patches, I figured we'd merge
> > them all into next merge window and let the -stable maintainers figure
> > it all out.
> > 
> > As this is more urgent than I believed, we need to figure out what to
> > do.
> > 
> > a) Pluck out the two cc:stable patches, merge just those into 6.19-rc.
> > 
> > b) Merge all of them into 6.19-rc, let -stable maintainers figure it out
> 
> Right. We can just CC: stable on comment fixes #2 and #3 to make 
> back-porting easier.

Yep.  Seems lame to be backporting comment fixes because real fixes
were textually dependent.  Also seems lame to retain known-wrong
comments in stable kernels!

> > 
> > 
> > Also, David, where do we stand with
> > 
> > : I'd love to get some generic hugetlb testing on arm64 and powerpc,
> > : that do hugetlb TLB flushing stuff a bit more special.
> > :
> > : I'll try doing some arm64 testing early in the new year myself.
> > 
> > ?
> 
> Not done yet, unfortunately. (I don't (yet) have easy access to decent 
> arm64 hardware ;) )
> 
> I still hope that Jann could quickly have a look, but it's been a while 
> already since I posted v1.

OK.  It may well have had the hoped-for testing in linux-next, only we
didn't hear about it.