Re: [PATCH 2/2] hugetlb: revert use of page_cache_next_miss()

From: Andrew Morton
Date: Wed Jun 21 2023 - 18:52:10 EST


On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 15:46:57 -0700 Mike Kravetz <mike.kravetz@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 06/21/23 15:39, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 21 Jun 2023 15:19:58 -0700 Sidhartha Kumar <sidhartha.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > > IMPORTANT NOTE FOR STABLE BACKPORTS:
> > > > This patch will apply cleanly to v6.3. However, due to the change of
> > > > filemap_get_folio() return values, it will not function correctly. This
> > > > patch must be modified for stable backports.
> > >
> > > This patch I sent previously can be used for the 6.3 backport:
> > >
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/b5bd2b39-7e1e-148f-7462-9565773f6d41@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#me37b56ca89368dc8dda2a33d39f681337788d13c
> >
> > Are we suggesting that this be backported? If so, I'll add the cc:stable.
> >
> > Because -stable maintainers have been asked not to backport MM patches to
> > which we didn't add the cc:stable.
>
> Yes, we need to get a fix into 6.3 as well.
>
> The 'issue' with a backport is noted in the IMPORTANT NOTE above.
>
> My concern is that adding cc:stable will have it automatically picked up
> and this would make things worse than they are in 6.3.
>
> My 'plan' was to not add the cc:stable, but manually create a patch for
> 6.3 once this goes upstream. Honestly, I am not sure what is the best
> way to deal with this. I could also try to catch the email about the
> automatic backport and say 'no, use this new patch instead'.

OK, how about I leave it without cc:stable, so you can send the 6.3
version at a time of your choosing?