On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 05:41:01AM +0000, Nadav Amit wrote:
> at 10:23 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 06:54:06AM -0700, Nadav Amit wrote:
> >> When balloon batching is not supported by the hypervisor, the guest
> >> frame number (GFN) must fit in 32-bit. However, due to a bug, this check
> >> was mistakenly ignored. In practice, when total RAM is greater than
> >> 16TB, the balloon does not work currently, making this bug unlikely to
> >> happen.
> >>
> >> Fixes: ef0f8f112984 ("VMware balloon: partially inline vmballoon_reserve_page.")
> >>
> >> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Again, no blank line between these things.
> >
> > Also, please break this up into two different patch series. One for
> > 4.18-final and one for 4.19-rc1. You should always split up bugfixes
> > from new features/cleanups as that is what I have to do when sending
> > them to Linus.
>
> I have only sent what I thought is appropriate for 4.18 (cleanup/features
> will be sent separately):
>
> * 5 bug fixes (1-5/7)
> * 1 update the maintainer list (7/7)
> * 1 update to the comment to prevent checkpatch from complaining (6/7)
>
> If you think any patch is unsuitable to 4.18 - please say which.
How do I know which patch goes to which branch? Please make it so
obvious I can not get it wrong. Remember, I get 1000 emails a day, you
don't want me to have to make a judgement call about anything, as I will
mess it up :)
thanks,
greg k-h
