On Sun, Oct 27, 2024 at 1:40 PM Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 10/26/24 06:40, Yu Zhao wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 10:24 PM Andrew Morton > > <akpm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Is a -stable backport needed? > >> > >> If so, is a Fixes: target identifiable? > > > > The code has been there for many years, and we only recently noticed > > the problem from Link's repro. So it doesn't look like a stable > > material. > > The stable backportability would be limited as there's a prerequisity on the > "mm: page_alloc: freelist migratetype hygiene" patchset from half a year ago > - patch applicability wise and importantly functionality wise. I don't see any dependency to that series. > Otherwise the > counter could drift easily. Care to elaborate how that could happen? > However we could perhaps mark it for a 6.12 stable backport as that's > presumably the upcoming LTS. Right.
