On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 08:15:04PM -0400, Pasha Tatashin wrote: > On Tue, Oct 21, 2025 at 4:53 PM Andrew Morton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 21 Oct 2025 12:04:47 -0400 Pasha Tatashin > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > With liveupdate: dropped from the subjects > > > > > > I noticed "liveupdate: " subject prefix left over only after sending > > > these patches. Andrew, would you like me to resend them, or could you > > > remove the prefix from these patches? > > > > No problem. > > > > What should we do about -stable kernels? > > > > It doesn't seem worthwhile to backport a 3-patch series for a pretty > > obscure bug. Perhaps we could merge a patch which disables this > > We are using KHO and have had obscure crashes due to this memory > corruption, with stacks all over the place. I would prefer this fix to > be properly backported to stable so we can also automatically consume > it once we switch to the upstream KHO. I do not think disabling kfence > in the Google fleet to resolve this problem would work for us, so if > it is not going to be part of stable, we would have to backport it > manually anyway.
The backport to stable is only relevant to 6.17 that's going to be EOL soon anyway. Do you really think it's worth the effort? > Thanks, > Pasha > > > combination in Kconfig, as a 6.18-rcX hotfix with a cc:stable. > > > > Then for 6.19-rc1 we add this series and a fourth patch which undoes > > that Kconfig change? -- Sincerely yours, Mike.
