Re: [PATCH v5 3/3] mm/mempolicy: Support memory hotplug in weighted interleave

[Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>]

On Wed, 2 Apr 2025 13:18:51 +0900 Honggyu Kim <honggyu.kim@sk.com> wrote:

> This is to fix the following broken status.
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/b8ac8654-92bd-4c08-a3fc-e28a7be5e0e6@sk.com
> 
> So we must add the following tag for this patch.
> Fixes: fa3bea4e1f82 ("mm/mempolicy: introduce MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE for 
> weighted interleaving")
> 
> 
> Hi Gregory,
> 
> This patch is already in Andrew's tree. Is the current version okay for you?
> 
> 
> Hi Andrew,
> 
> I'm not sure if this is going to the final version but could you please add this
> patch to stable with Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>?
> We might need to bring the whole series to avoid conflicts to stable tree.

This is all rather confused.

Do we need to backport all three patches into -stable?  If so, all three
should have Fixes:.  Preferably they all have the same Fixes: so we
aren't backporting untested patch combinations.

I presently have:

Subject: mm/mempolicy: fix memory leaks in weighted interleave sysfs
Fixes: dce41f5ae253 ("mm/mempolicy: implement the sysfs-based weighted_interleave interface")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>

Subject: mm/mempolicy: support dynamic sysfs updates for weighted interleave
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>

Subject: mm/mempolicy: support memory hotplug in weighted interleave
Fixes: fa3bea4e1f82 ("mm/mempolicy: introduce MPOL_WEIGHTED_INTERLEAVE for weighted interleaving")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>


[2/3] doesn't look like a fix.

Perhaps the whole thing should be redone: a two-patch bugfix series,
each with a Fixes: and a cc:stable and feature patch with neither a
Fixes: nor a cc:stable.