linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V5 0/2] mm/khugepaged: fix dirty page handling for MADV

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: <c63df10d-c61c-4337-9c88-ed1ce81204a1@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2026 10:58:39 +0100
From: "David Hildenbrand (Red Hat)" <david@...nel.org>
To: "Garg, Shivank" <shivankg@....com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@...cle.com>, Zi Yan <ziy@...dia.com>,
 Baolin Wang <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
 "Liam R . Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@...cle.com>, Nico Pache
 <npache@...hat.com>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
 Dev Jain <dev.jain@....com>, Barry Song <baohua@...nel.org>,
 Lance Yang <lance.yang@...ux.dev>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
 Zach O'Keefe <zokeefe@...gle.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 0/2] mm/khugepaged: fix dirty page handling for
 MADV_COLLAPSE

On 1/19/26 06:07, Garg, Shivank wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1/19/2026 1:52 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> Please tolerate a little whining about the timeliess here.  We're at
>> -rc6, v4 was added to mm.git over a month ago, had quite a lot of
>> review, this is very close to being moved into the mm-stable branch and now
>> we get v5.  Argh.
>>
> I sincerely apologize for this.
> 
> I had this doubt on sending an incremental patch or V5:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/7a42515f-ae57-4f4d-831c-87689930a797@amd.com
> 
> 
>>> V5:
>>> - In patch 2/2, Simplify dirty writeback retry logic (David)
>> Are you sure this is the only change?  It looks like a lot for a
>> simplification and I'm wondering if we should retain the v4 series and
>> defer a simplification for separate consideration during the next
>> cycle.
> 
> Yes, patch 1/2 is unchanged and patch 2/2 is the only change.
> The diff looks larger due to code movement but logic is actually simpler now.
> 
> I completely understand if you prefer to keep V4 and defer this
> refactoring. I'm sorry for creating this late-cycle churn. Please let me
> know what you'd prefer and I'll follow your guidance.

There is no reason to rush any of this. :)

Review was not over and due to multiple factors my review on v4 came in 
later than I wanted.

Andrew, if you prefer, I can start sending as a reply to every patch set 
that I want to review so you are aware that it is on my review backlog.

Unfortunately we can't have nice things (sub-maintainer acks).

-- 
Cheers

David