On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 02:19:53PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jul 2024 20:49:43 +0200 Danilo Krummrich <dakr@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Properly document that if __GFP_ZERO logic is requested, callers must > > ensure that, starting with the initial memory allocation, every > > subsequent call to this API for the same memory allocation is flagged > > with __GFP_ZERO. Otherwise, it is possible that __GFP_ZERO is not fully > > honored by this API. > > I appear to have just seen this, in a separate mailing. What you have seen in a separate mail is a similar patch for krealloc() [1]. This one is a fixup for vrealloc() from a previous submission you've applied to mm-unstable. > > Please, slow down. We have two months. Await reviewer feedback, spend > time over those changelogs, value clarity and accuracy and completeness > over hastiness. The only reason for rushing things is if a patch is > disrupting ongoing testing of the linux-next tree. There was a discussion in [2], which lead to this fixup series. In terms of changelogs this series is indeed a bit "lax", since I have recognized that you queue up fixup patches for changes that did already land in mm-unstable to be squashed into the original commits later on. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240730194214.31483-1-dakr@xxxxxxxxxx/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mm/20240722163111.4766-1-dakr@xxxxxxxxxx/T/#m065a7f875b44dc945dd535c2b7168c3d77a98993
