On 02/06/2023 22:43, SeongJae Park wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 19:15:01 +0000 SeongJae Park <sj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hi Ryan,
>>
>> On Fri, 2 Jun 2023 18:14:25 +0100 Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>> On 02/06/2023 17:35, Yu Zhao wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Jun 2, 2023 at 3:30 AM Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> It is racy to non-atomically read a pte, then clear the young bit, then
>>>>> write it back as this could discard dirty information. Further, it is
>>>>> bad practice to directly set a pte entry within a table. Instead
>>>>> clearing young must go through the arch-provided helper,
>>>>> ptep_test_and_clear_young() to ensure it is modified atomically and to
>>>>> give the arch code visibility and allow it to check (and potentially
>>>>> modify) the operation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Fixes: 3f49584b262c ("mm/damon: implement primitives for the virtual memory address spaces").
>>>>
>>>> Just to double check: was "Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" overlooked or
>>>> deemed unnecessary?
>>>
>>> It was overlooked - incompetance strikes again! I was intending to cc the
>>> whole series.
>>
>> Not the whole patches in this series but only this patch is intended to be
>> merged in stable series, right? If I'm not wrong, you could add
>> 'Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>' tag here[1] when resending, to let stable kernel
>> maintainers easily understand exactly what patches should be merged in the
>> stable kernels. So, you wouldn't need to touch coverletter or cc whole series
>> but only this one.
>>
>> [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.10/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
>
> And I just found Andrew added the tag while adding this to the -mm queue.
> Thank you, Andrew!
Yes indeed - thanks for fixing that up for me, Andrew!
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/mm-commits/20230602205509.9DFBDC433D2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
>
> Thanks,
> SJ
>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> SJ
>>
