From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f177.google.com (mail-pf1-f177.google.com [209.85.210.177]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 737AC315D2E for ; Fri, 5 Sep 2025 19:14:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.177 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757099643; cv=none; b=kPVtn/8/YFP3RL/pH8VIQWAFSCmBw3oqw4GC8Bmhg4UZbAzd57/hmay9TDkN5wMiRNRpM2p6bML8nVCJhIap6T6izpuJNoyViZgbnYraB7l3Fn2M+sZl+G2nj55BwNQNCjrDTVHJZfmAVFHNbCX/ERavOfFCaMp5GeVmhI++KjM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757099643; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ogRuMQFeAGOymg8wQrX8REfn0ikj+Fj0MUpDTeWOh+Q=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=kk4DgIzjdHXiEccje0qsiY8jiHupUXTen23tG6CEcFx8H3aKRGYOa5YAt+ZvGxf//QCGXmlVP9MpcZcmyy0zsXvS4g6Hl9cCzR+Gat+KfnfTOUIryLdDKtjVS/TEVR5gfl+gaN5hjJDgO7fvhzQ7EYVKzEYjxdDNPijtqu9VZEw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=purestorage.com; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=purestorage.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=purestorage.com header.i=@purestorage.com header.b=IeAv/sL4; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.177 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=purestorage.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=fail smtp.mailfrom=purestorage.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=purestorage.com header.i=@purestorage.com header.b="IeAv/sL4" Received: by mail-pf1-f177.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-772759a7dfbso231647b3a.3 for ; Fri, 05 Sep 2025 12:14:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=purestorage.com; s=google2022; t=1757099641; x=1757704441; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=fX9Q1Z82rqELs3VftvCK7vHHBqL7+0LiZF2iKflj/qU=; b=IeAv/sL4+FEvDjvCgGqbdUbGM4UNWBUwK5BfhHt7Pl58cBSSvhPC2LVvWc4S0SpDKn uF+qxsPSBKmJV/mowvc8H3XA6Ukw07//CM71ss65JfvFDviK/gYoupXJ+UVaMRyHCIWt nVnQ7Z5xYzODRIlp2HQuss8iwi7Y+d6pK3V+8j1Mponl3K1qbpZDyyzYGXZxEcja+RNW mC3E0QCUCnAP2Pc3QxV/Q1pstVlKSwM/SmsXFMc8rwZunwkjaCSCD+dOTwNYvSKsgB1D N/cLS4pdwSXtrZda3WqftIYgoDgSogAggItqGBUieEYNmTn+fOn5Bs7b3SYugTaR8FOc s5Sw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1757099641; x=1757704441; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fX9Q1Z82rqELs3VftvCK7vHHBqL7+0LiZF2iKflj/qU=; b=ioBGn+mpX+qzjT8kSaRjEVVzBPyZzbyDB7D9DLupEmwQRWEjg77RUn70ktEM7NdTB7 RyODvp1xViGUE1LrJUTXLSf1/EP26H8dHHA9k7bWdNAN6cCyiXNmpe9JCkrTmN5sqwRk BmQfWT1AgHUZQh7G/+c6nthh+8Esx0avNbUxdyb0IV1C8dUgzZrKW5pgS4x7HKLfN2G0 jeXHbH1571Rk4iSsaHzOwG/8e8KiZvlJfIM0H9/uGAWl8xJNxa49ai12eZZRQNolcvSn QJmXURHhdRyqPwQJoYhM4EzJJ9EhFoZ+EJPiL58fzcQEhQJFaN0nFDwqKgplv16ah0ur k4dQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVHIJYbD1nEYSUa4IYDdAM4QIy5teBkyc38/5zGJDLmh0ktAPWL3X9xWlj4KJ7CtKxcmAPgoLAyOw==@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxpWrkRBDaeSLLsL+H0gA1ZwMOd0kIlsh77nZAOIcoYa7TSu6Nh Tbx3U1ittorH71Yn2cU9S1xHj/2FtfhEqpVQt+CfJXfUUke/Vnf1OHImrhs6O1Zl8NJJvL+/kFr 5xEyoPuTxvJLIDIkaNxo+SQgI3atCrYjDZcbSk9V1Sw== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncshv8NQyNrg+Bm/0wwGDk3MCUCzp9gSbS6vDSecs7ZSjIVmZ5joHC8Vh3+ObPq A3itas+x9F2oRYnF+fA7g19I7luhuzPds0wG3LKDBb+pWSQmAWrk7oi1PWN5ShzeaTilHBqBOJM EcRIC4hXuGmFJmfKGyzkmVfW+vkheFUaVDyraA8QYo7lMNxnHCaKCQIyoLO6oGNlJAel/m3jxqg AQs5XtF3NBe9N+k2ufBzC0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEE8PufdF6KPU2wS1JXaMJ8NvTMJ0aXU61DIrasRN8b4fzlkUHR1cqvp0DPHwSxoz0q3HbmuL/CFtGR2b9loy8= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90b:2250:b0:32b:aed4:aa1a with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-32baed4ade9mr3970756a91.4.1757099640579; Fri, 05 Sep 2025 12:14:00 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: io-uring@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <9ef87524-d15c-4b2c-9f86-00417dad9c48@kernel.dk> In-Reply-To: From: Caleb Sander Mateos Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2025 12:13:48 -0700 X-Gm-Features: Ac12FXyQVbvCNly74ch1I2GsEZiW4vUkm2Ern8Oy5ByKcadZy4GawEnB--JoHHU Message-ID: Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] io_uring fix for 6.17-rc5 To: Jens Axboe Cc: Linus Torvalds , io-uring , Konstantin Ryabitsev Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Sep 5, 2025 at 12:04=E2=80=AFPM Jens Axboe wrote: > > On 9/5/25 11:24 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, 5 Sept 2025 at 04:18, Jens Axboe wrote: > >> > >> Just a single fix for an issue with the resource node rewrite that > >> happened a few releases ago. Please pull! > > > > I've pulled this, but the commentary is strange, and the patch makes > > no sense to me, so I unpulled it again. > > > > Yes, it changes things from kvmalloc_array() to kvcalloc(). Fine. > > > > And yes, kvcalloc() clearly clears the resulting allocation. Also fine. > > > > But even in the old version, it used __GFP_ZERO. > > > > In fact, afaik the *ONLY* difference between kvcalloc() and > > kvmalloc_array() array is that kvcalloc() adds the __GFP_ZERO to the > > flags argument: > > > > #define kvcalloc_node_noprof(_n,_s,_f,_node) \ > > kvmalloc_array_node_noprof(_n,_s,(_f)|__GFP_ZERO,_node) > > > > so afaik, this doesn't actually fix anything at all. > > Agree, I think I was too hasty in queueing that up. I overlooked that we > already had __GFP_ZERO in there. On the road this week and tending to > these kinds of duties in between, my bad. Caleb?? Sorry, this is my fault. I misread the code, the __GFP_ZERO does ensure the correct behavior. kvcalloc() might more clearly indicate the intent, but there's no bug. Apologies for the hasty patch, and agree it can be dropped. Best, Caleb > > > And dammit, this commit has that promising "Link:" argument that I > > hoped would explain why this pointless commit exists, but AS ALWAYS > > that link only wasted my time by pointing to the same damn information > > that was already there. > > [snip long rant on Link: tags] > > I just always add these, because discussion might happen after the fact. > For example, someone might run into an issue from an added patch, and > reply to the list. That does happen. > > IMHO it's better to have a Link and it _potentially_ being useful than > not to have it and then need to search around for it. Searching is MUCH > worse than the disappointment of a Link that tells you nothing that > isn't in the commit already, and it wastes a lot more time. > > And if you're applying a series of patches, then it'll take you to the > cover letter. Which is useful. All without needing to go search on lore. > You could argue that you could turn any applied series into a merge and > add the cover letter there, or link it at least, but lots of things > don't end up in a merge commit before you pull it. > > What is the hurt here, really, other than you being disappointed there's > nothing extra in the link? > > I, and everybody else, can surely start making judgement calls on when > to add the Link or not. But that seems error prone, and might indeed > miss useful cases because a bug report comes in AFTER the fact. > > In any case, if it really bothers you that much, then just make it > policy. Historically I suppose policy has very much been formed by Linus > rants in replies, which then gets picked up by LWN and others and then > it becomes part of "Linux kernel lore" of this is what Linus expects. > But I bet you that LWN would pick up a Linus email on the topic that > isn't a reply, which said that you've observed Link: tag being used > frivilously and why you find that annoying. And THAT would save you a > lot more time rather than need to rant about it multiple times. > > -- > Jens Axboe