Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <1d3b071f-ead7-4431-c9f8-c712e7c8bdc6@bytedance.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Apr 2023 17:53:44 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.1
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Some fixes and cleanup for maple tree.
To:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc:     Liam.Howlett@oracle.com, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, maple-tree@lists.infradead.org
References: <20230314124203.91572-1-zhangpeng.00@bytedance.com>
 <20230404132702.9240f3a77d0c00fca4b9bf55@linux-foundation.org>
From:   Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@bytedance.com>
In-Reply-To: <20230404132702.9240f3a77d0c00fca4b9bf55@linux-foundation.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


在 2023/4/5 04:27, Andrew Morton 写道:

> On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 20:42:00 +0800 Peng Zhang <zhangpeng.00@bytedance.com> wrote:
>
>> Some fixes and clean up for maple tree.
>>
>> The bug fixed by [PATCH v2 1/3] does not seem to be triggered due to some
>> coincidences, because now the implementation of mtree_lookup_walk() scans
>> pivots one by one and exits the loop early. The test cases for the bugs fixed by
>> [PATCH v2 3/3] are difficult to write. If I think of how to write them later,
>> I will send them out. So I send out the second edition first.
> Do we feel that any of these should be backported into -stable kernels?
> [3/3] looks to be a candidate for this?

Both [1/3] and [3/3] can be sent to the stable kernel, do I need to do anything?