Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.32 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.32;
Date:   Wed, 18 Oct 2023 09:22:53 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To:     Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc:     Liu Shixin <liushixin2@huawei.com>,
        Patrick Wang <patrick.wang.shcn@gmail.com>,
        Kefeng Wang <wangkefeng.wang@huawei.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] mm: kmemleak: use mem_pool_free() to free object
Message-Id: <20231018092253.a12815afa7db9049f95fc195@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <ZTAAftQF8ReYAHlF@arm.com>
References: <20231018102952.3339837-1-liushixin2@huawei.com>
        <20231018102952.3339837-6-liushixin2@huawei.com>
        <ZS_-MBDKXR9qFXDb@arm.com>
        <ZTAAftQF8ReYAHlF@arm.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 18 Oct 2023 16:57:50 +0100 Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:

> > Could you please reorder this patch before the previous one? If you
> > added a Fixes tag, we may want a cc stable as well (as for the other
> > patches with a Fixes tag) and it makes more sense to backport it on its
> > own without the __create_object() split. Otherwise:
> 
> Ah, ignore this. If we want a cc stable, the whole thing needs
> backporting, including the split which is essential for the subsequent
> fix.

Do we want a cc:stable?  That tag wasn't originally included.

If so, all seven patches?

If "not all seven" then can we please have two series, one for the
backport patches, one for next merge window.