Re: [PATCH v2] regset: use kvzalloc() for regset_get_alloc()

[Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>]

Hi,

On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 8:33 AM Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not trying to be a pest here, so if this is on someone's todo list
> > and they'll get to it eventually then feel free to tell me to go away
> > and I'll snooze this for another few months. I just want to make sure
> > it's not forgotten.
> >
> > I've been assuming that someone like Al Viro or Christian Brauner
> > would land this patch eventually and I know Al responded rather
> > quickly to my v1 [2]. I think all of Al's issues were resolved by Mark
> > Brown's patch [1] (which has landed in the arm64 tree) and my updating
> > of the patch description in v2. I see that Al and Christian are
> > flagged as maintainers of "fs/binfmt_elf.c" which is one of the two
> > files I'm touching, so that's mostly why I was assuming they would
> > land it.
> >
> > ...but I realize that perhaps my assumptions are wrong and this needs
> > to go through a different maintainer. In this case (if I'm reading it
> > correctly) Al and Christian are listed because the file is under "fs"
> > even though this isn't _really_ much of a filesystem-related patch.
> > Perhaps this needs to go through something like Andrew Morton's tree
> > since he often picks up patches that have nowhere else to land? If
> > someone else has suggestions, I'm all ears. I'm also happy to repost
> > this patch in case it helps with a maintainer applying it.
>
> FWIW, for this patch:
>
> Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>

Thanks!

> Yeah, normally Al or Christian would take it but with their ack we can
> also take it through the arm64 tree (or Andrew can pick it up through
> the mm tree).

OK, let's see what folks say.


> With Mark's fix, I assume this is no longer urgent, cc stable material,
> but rather something nice in the future to reduce the risk of allocation
> failure on this path.

It's not quite as urgent as before Mark's fix, which gets rid of the
order 7 allocation. ...but an unnecessary order 5 allocation is still
nothing to sneeze at. I'd let others make the decision about whether
to CC stable, but I'll at least advocate backporting it to all the
kernel trees I'm directly involved in.

-Doug