Re: [PATCH mm-unstable v4 0/5] mm: khugepaged cleanups and mTHP prerequisites

Nico Pache
2026-03-26T16:48:50Z

On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 10:45 PM Roman Gushchin
<roman.gushchin@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 25 Mar 2026 05:40:17 -0600 Nico Pache <npache@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> MAINTAINER NOTE: This is based on mm-unstable with the coresponding
> >> patches reverted then reapplied.
> >
> > Unfortunately the update-in-place trick fooled AI review, which might
> > have been useful. Oh well. In retrospect we could have avoided that
> > by you asking me to drop v3 a couple of days before mailing out v4.
> >
> > otoh, this series *does* apply to the mm-stable branch. Roman, I
> > though Sashiko is attempting that?
>
> It did, but for some reason it failed.
> You can actually see which trees/branches it tried under the Baseline
> section for each patchset. And yes, I need to improve it to log specific
> sha's, not only something like mm/mm-new. Now it's kinda hard to say why
> it failed.

I dont think this was Sashkio's fault; this doesn't apply cleanly to
anything other than mm-unstable with my patches first reverted. I
first tried an mm-stable base but my code is now dependent on some
code in mm-unstable. As Andrew noted, I should have requested that he
pull the patches from mm-unstable before resending them.

-- Nico

>