On Sat, Jan 03, 2026 at 09:58:45AM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 2 Jan 2026 19:08:37 +0000 Lorenzo Stoakes 
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 07:02:40PM +0000, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote:
> > > +cc literally everyone you should have cc'd in mm :/
> > >
> > > Hi Mikulas,
> > >
> > > You really need to check MAINTAINERS, you've sent a patch that changes 
> > > mm/vma.c
> > > without cc'ing a single maintainer or reviewer of that file. I just 
> > > happened to
> > > notice this by chance, even lei seemed to mess up the file query for some
> > > reason.
> >
> > Ah yes, it's because this patch breaks the VMA userland tests.
> >
> > You need to modify tools/testing/vma/vma_internal.h and rename 
> > signal_pending() to
> > fatal_signal_pending().
> >
> > You can check it by going to the tools/testing/vma directory running make 
> > and
> > executing the vma executable.
> >
> > This one I don't blame you for, there were meant to be CI tests for this in 
> > mm
> > but for some reason that's just not been done.
> >
> > But this needs fixing. If this is being backported to all human history you
> > probably don't want to do that, but that leaves commits with broken tests 
> > in so
> > an alternative would be to add a patch that gets added before this one that 
> > adds
> > fatal_signal_pending() to vma_internal.h.
> >
> > But not sure how feasible that is? Andrew?
>
> Not understanding why it requires a separate patch.  Can we modify this
> patch so it makes the necessary alterations to selftests?
>

Because afaict this needs backporting to every single stable kernel (we
need a fixes tag clearly, I reviewed that elsewhere), so doing other stuff
might make it not-backportable or at least very very unreasonably painful.

Thanks, Lorenzo

Reply via email to