On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 06:14:15PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 21:03:53 -0400 Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > When PTE_MARKER_UFFD_WP not configured, it's still possible to reach pte
> > marker code and trigger an warning. Add a few CONFIG_PTE_MARKER_UFFD_WP
> > ifdefs to make sure the code won't be reached when not compiled in.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Is 679d10331910180 ("mm: introduce PTE_MARKER swap entry") the
> appropriate Fixes: target?
I forgot the stable notations, sorry. Probably better use the one that
enables the whole thing, because the diff will touch a few patches later
than 679d10331910180 too, which means the suitable tag could be:
Fixes: b1f9e876862d ("mm/uffd: enable write protection for shmem & hugetlbfs")
>
> Should we backport to -stable?
Yes, 5.19 may need it too (if it'll still squeeze into 6.0; or 6.0 too).
--
Peter Xu
