From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793944252; b=u6c8E7CmwoX648lWEN3H/qpGrM0DMSystz2VNCoUo5I9DzskbZj/E+VO61+tlcC1K/2d G8lq7i1hGuelrYBpfNAy+dc3U4wPtXJF3/7WRcINKKqP6OpymzUha69T20HDeynaKVoVz eXhrAWy0XdjDFX+PZIlvAialUnmNCTuWVK05CjAoBWmJ/IeRpopIQMC6GRmQLGeX8F2pi FjTmiPTgJigCybLy+fvCiATiNp/zv4YzaMybRJ0m3vqAjTl0IbexQBR9Os3DjmSYD1hxl DYABV57pOquktDl1/WReEvpR/uSdVLc+416L+oxQScb/j2pBVApP3Szjg2G8ADurTcA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793944252; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID: References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; bh=vkwduMqYAfdl/KfY8u0XGrj5UOL1s9uwI783UTJT08A=; b=usNznIdvRGw5SGNe5+F26ISpAlk8nLD5YfZppD6NB2IVqpcUWdnV9o+4gITh5VOaIQEt h+KNXyoFUmfnZC7M94H7X2cFz1ZgtVCfZ5IHLbUqglH0Y4fU2hvIldaKlmQn4S78VXcXm trbNxdXR12dtzmbvjpBKeWXazzcfamZr3nkBc3G+cQCrz2IhTKaSM8g61FaIJjX8T5srO Kg0ussGV5DunQo94ACSYkfOCATk56w3nFOfGpHB2jeugjoHfxZItNqTcTsiW5nFCYQphh RuD0w80/amoeCk2QHfAljRcfErWWE3uuUra20DcsNtEcAz+v2cuV7GLsi8Mg8MrRKjg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=jZBEJp8S; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3FD6A606A32D; Fri, 6 Nov 2026 05:50:52 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=jZBEJp8S Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 76EF01F0089F; Fri, 6 Nov 2026 05:50:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1793944251; bh=vkwduMqYAfdl/KfY8u0XGrj5UOL1s9uwI783UTJT08A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=jZBEJp8Se8g0VR3BMOOsKQtTVxEIf2NFDuWpyMLHOJ4vGIK8goi4b9D6rZvYe5hLj XltKVv3P8zfDRQk2qnEPO0rBcnYOovctdU1/zwewB/qF8iRd/Guyoj4WKOT3jTfVJc y8BJvUMAShufXs5FgNC780uJlG7h5wx4DVL3ZzN3Hsa4LQdrYChEjukuKNLNban7/1 PNrYAuE378GXIMExAUJvSrBuSpVk5wcdLAVnDIodD8UskiyvHUzuaUwV9M41twCJX1 CJJYPHcB0SCGD+qbxz+nqVuAqbaCqUhHPKIfwlUSNxE8kjuXWE3JIPU51WWQ05uwCG tHx2XTBqcRPUg== Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2026 06:50:45 +0100 From: "Oscar Salvador (SUSE)" To: Qi Zheng Cc: muchun.song@linux.dev, osalvador@suse.de, david@kernel.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, azpijr@gmail.com, lance.yang@linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Qi Zheng Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] mm: hugetlb: fix GFP mask propagation to CMA Message-ID: References: <1535887c-6be2-4415-b54e-2008e6e7a35c@linux.dev> X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1535887c-6be2-4415-b54e-2008e6e7a35c@linux.dev> On Fri, Nov 06, 2026 at 10:43:53AM +0800, Qi Zheng wrote: > I'd still prefer to keep __GFP_COMP so that > cma_alloc_frozen_compound() itself guarantees compound allocation, > without requiring callers to supply the flag. Well, but aren't all callers hugetlb? And we already do supply __GFP_COMP there for evident reasons. And should that not be the case, and you want to catch someone who went rogue, I would just place a WARN_ON_ONCE to catch it here, so we know who is not following the rules. Makes sense? -- Oscar Salvador SUSE Labs