From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8EFBC2E6CA8 for ; Thu, 4 Dec 2025 21:57:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764885468; cv=none; b=p5els2Zskj50VLwSgTkQ7piW/CsuBsEDmg46tGGSNToKLk4tqzZMLvDDcItnitsExm1XOGWtz1tNBp+HF53t1Mv2zHQkJPemvfciCzwdmITcme4cetQNRrDfWQ0PcmykZdFvwhwLpJDO2BR1d0wx44+Z0nhD75jIDonip2GSsb0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1764885468; c=relaxed/simple; bh=X9n/SI6IKvE+F0NdeSHaFU7vcgdgXOCeq4cTbmL1cFw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=OEFssQsVfNCF9WkMRVKsPQv+BqXSk+28lLzaaoOnBTByfOlR2AHW+M12UO/vKGEQdOuEF3nUJc1sxr8lW3h1tOEJ4j9Nv4uVfwT7btK1opawGl/iOlNizk/AE6cqnaWkiVgd7Cu9BW4fqg/ZpsjefRQ4cO/cLtjeGo8t/mgVGCk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b=k9q35YFw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux-foundation.org header.i=@linux-foundation.org header.b="k9q35YFw" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6D8EFC4CEFB; Thu, 4 Dec 2025 21:57:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=linux-foundation.org; s=korg; t=1764885468; bh=X9n/SI6IKvE+F0NdeSHaFU7vcgdgXOCeq4cTbmL1cFw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=k9q35YFw4ap/XLACqc1kqO+8+Ix4RJb9p5Wre06HB3UZOOw6lkzrZFHB/kRL5DRvS 9jYimUKT7EXuHJx89pikNeF1l9K/ZdtSDsNHRFZOgqkT47Wblto8ZYyM9jyIP5tyxf rMM48sJsTXyDerFSED8Eaa2bIRcDIGTfhpX8ibAE= Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2025 13:57:46 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: Shuah Khan Cc: david@kernel.org, maddy@linux.ibm.com, mpe@ellerman.id.au, npiggin@gmail.com, christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, vbabka@suse.cz, rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, masahiroy@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "mm: fix MAX_FOLIO_ORDER on powerpc configs with hugetlb" Message-Id: <20251204135746.6d291cc861b4507b1fe95aaa@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20251204023358.54107-1-skhan@linuxfoundation.org> References: <20251204023358.54107-1-skhan@linuxfoundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.7.0 (GTK+ 2.24.33; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 3 Dec 2025 19:33:56 -0700 Shuah Khan wrote: > This reverts commit 39231e8d6ba7f794b566fd91ebd88c0834a23b98. > > Enabling HAVE_GIGANTIC_FOLIOS broke kernel build and git clone on two > systems. git fetch-pack fails when cloning large repos and make hangs > or errors out of Makefile.build with Error: 139. These failures are > random with git clone failing after fetching 1% of the objects, and > make hangs while compiling random files. > > The blow is is one of the git clone failures: > > git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git linux_6.19 > Cloning into 'linux_6.19'... > remote: Enumerating objects: 11173575, done. > remote: Counting objects: 100% (785/785), done. > remote: Compressing objects: 100% (373/373), done. > remote: Total 11173575 (delta 534), reused 505 (delta 411), pack-reused 11172790 (from 1) > Receiving objects: 100% (11173575/11173575), 3.00 GiB | 7.08 MiB/s, done. > Resolving deltas: 100% (9195212/9195212), done. > fatal: did not receive expected object 0002003e951b5057c16de5a39140abcbf6e44e50 > fatal: fetch-pack: invalid index-pack output 39231e8d6ba7 simply shuffles ifdefs and Kconfig items, so I assume it exposed a pre-existing bug. Reverting 39231e8d6ba7 will re-hide that bug. And that isn't a bad thing. If we re-hide the bug in 6.18.x and in mainline then that relieves the people who are hitting this and it takes the pressure off David, Mike and yourself to get the underlying bug fixed in a hurry. So I think I'll queue this as a hotfix, plan to send it Linuswards in a couple of days. Or Linus may choose to apply it directly or to do a local revert of 39231e8d6ba7. But I don't see how a local revert will get communicated to the 6.18.x maintainers. David, Linus, opinions please? > Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan Let's have a cc:stable here, just to be sure.