Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/vmemmap: Use direct-mapped VA instead of vmemmap-based VA

[Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>]

On 2/18/25 7:43 AM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Feb 2025 14:27:27 +0900 "Harry Yoo (Oracle)" <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>>> page table when accessing a vmemmap-based virtual address before this sync.
>>>
>>> Fixes: faf1c0008a33 ("x86/vmemmap: optimize for consecutive sections in partial populated PMDs")
>>> Signed-off-by: Gwan-gyeong Mun <gwan-gyeong.mun@intel.com>
>>> Cc: Oscar Salvador <osalvador@suse.de>
>>> Cc: Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>
>>
>> I think this fix is reasonable without changing existing code too much.
>> Any thoughts from x86 folks?
>>
>>> Cc: Byungchul Park <byungchul@sk.com>
>>> Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
>>> Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>
>>> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
>>> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
>>
>> Shouldn't we add Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>?
> 
@Harry, I missed cc'ing stable mailinglist, thanks for point-out.
> I'd say so, yes.  For many subsystems, a Fixes: means that -stable
> maintainers will automatically scoop it up.  For mm patches they have
> been asked to not do that - such patches require an explicit cc:stable
> (the MM developers wish to determine what is backported).
> 
> An explicit cc:stable removes all doubt.
> 
> Also, this patch should have cc'ed linux-mm, please.
> 
@Andrew Morton Cc'ing linux-mm is also something I missed. Thanks for 
the mention.
And thanks for the explaition of the fixes on mm patches.
> Anyway, I'll grab it pending additional review and I'll add the
> cc:stable, thanks.
> 
Thanks for the review.

G.G.