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;
Date:   Fri, 28 Jul 2023 10:41:03 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com>
Cc:     linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        stable@vger.kernel.org, willy@infradead.org,
        vishal.moola@gmail.com, wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com,
        minchan@kernel.org, yuzhao@google.com, david@redhat.com,
        ryan.roberts@arm.com, shy828301@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] madvise: don't use mapcount() against large folio
 for sharing check
Message-Id: <20230728104103.1357b394f9be6352a7c54c79@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20230728161356.1784568-3-fengwei.yin@intel.com>
References: <20230728161356.1784568-1-fengwei.yin@intel.com>
        <20230728161356.1784568-3-fengwei.yin@intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, 29 Jul 2023 00:13:56 +0800 Yin Fengwei <fengwei.yin@intel.com> wrote:

> Fixes: 98b211d6415f ("madvise: convert madvise_free_pte_range() to use a folio")
> Fixes: fc986a38b670 ("mm: huge_memory: convert madvise_free_huge_pmd to use a folio")

Having two Fixes: for one patch presumably makes backporting more
complicated and adds risk of making mistakes.

So I have split this into a three-patch series and I've fixed up the patch naming:

Subject: madvise:madvise_cold_or_pageout_pte_range(): don't use mapcount() against large folio for sharing check
Subject: madvise:madvise_free_huge_pmd(): don't use mapcount() against large folio for sharing check
Subject: madvise:madvise_free_pte_range(): don't use mapcount() against large folio for sharing check

I haven't added cc:stable at this time - that awaits the description of
user-visible effects.