On 2/28/19 8:11 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>> Secondly, 4fb8e5b89bcbbb ("include/linux/nodemask.h: use nr_node_ids
>>> (not MAX_NUMNODES) in __nodemask_pr_numnodes()") introduced a
>>
>> There's no such commit, that sha was probably from linux-next. The patch is
>> still in mmotm [1]. Luckily, I would say. Maybe Linus or some automation could
>> run some script to check for bogus Fixes tags before accepting patches?
>
> Ah, that's a relief.
>
> How about we just drop "include/linux/nodemask.h: use nr_node_ids (not
> MAX_NUMNODES) in __nodemask_pr_numnodes()"
> (https://ozlabs.org/~akpm/mmotm/broken-out/include-linux-nodemaskh-use-nr_node_ids-not-max_numnodes-in-__nodemask_pr_numnodes.patch)?
> It's just a cosmetic thing, really.
Yeah the risk of breaking something is not worth it, IMHO.
