From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C84E135CB7E for ; Fri, 16 Jan 2026 09:54:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768557268; cv=none; b=jXqR0SGI9YvIXukhAqnVq/tkmenrO3aR0aM0aI67a0jyR3QKDeSCCuqGcEeDP5fKEiVsjq4JYXvpLxDlqlgxdTn1P0cfQXubFpqEI1AcZhzeUx3DM0UJ1YWrR1nSlZ/IOv9y3D5yUpeQjUe+rJIkaUQaY85WGHkdkaEyUgsOUvA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768557268; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qucOCLpK0VCp0p49hSiIXgcqZKwXcARG0+yWY+O/P84=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=EKhyy33cGLiby6dFTBFxsh9V4eO1SDLsfLz2KCJOqmync4amgSfAQIxNnGqFYEmcwrpaAppjiAT8x0AY21pzI/F9FNTmi8rkPQ4XYWLq9XNayrDbZmgxzCwNjs58ufiGYrVnbrEBH5NPYJiHvF0VOHTjh2DJhrU3g+dvSc/9F5c= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1DC621515; Fri, 16 Jan 2026 01:54:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.164.136.46] (unknown [10.164.136.46]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F1EF53F694; Fri, 16 Jan 2026 01:54:19 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <8509450b-e223-455e-b44f-03f77705639b@arm.com> Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2026 15:24:16 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH mm-unstable] mm: Fix uffd-wp bit loss when batching file folio unmapping To: Lorenzo Stoakes Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, axelrasmussen@google.com, yuanchu@google.com, weixugc@google.com, david@kernel.org, Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, vbabka@suse.cz, rppt@kernel.org, surenb@google.com, mhocko@suse.com, riel@surriel.com, harry.yoo@oracle.com, jannh@google.com, ryan.roberts@arm.com, baohua@kernel.org, baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20260116082721.275178-1-dev.jain@arm.com> <343f8462-44fd-4190-9fe2-8120b5403269@lucifer.local> <4b784eef-e874-45a6-828a-4fc2acab6fb7@arm.com> <15e2a0d8-e8f1-488c-8fce-c0a2a5182086@lucifer.local> Content-Language: en-US From: Dev Jain In-Reply-To: <15e2a0d8-e8f1-488c-8fce-c0a2a5182086@lucifer.local> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 16/01/26 3:18 pm, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 03:10:23PM +0530, Dev Jain wrote: >> On 16/01/26 2:09 pm, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: >> I saw that the last comment on that series was more than a week back, so best >> thought to just do a folded fix on top of it - and I had formed the impression >> (from the conversations on list) that akpm prefers fixes over respins : ) >> >> If a respin is preferred here then I am fine by that. >> > Generally we prefer fix-patches, sent in reply to the patch being altered and > sent by the series author. > > Sending a patch with a Fixes: tag is never the correct way to fixup a patch > unless they're upstream or unchangeably-bound-for-upstream with a commit hash > that will be the same in Linus's tree. > > You can by all means suggest a patch to an author by replying to the broken > patch, but then it's up to them whether to take it. Also then the courteous way > is to raise the issue in that reply and say something like 'it seems that the > below fixes the issue, can you check it?' or something like this. > > But the correct course is to the respond to the series in all cases like this. Alright! Thanks for your kind explanation. > > Thanks, Lorenzo