Hi Andrew
On 2026/9/3 06:05, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Wed, 2 Sep 2026 16:17:58 +0800 Hao Ge <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I ran into an overflow problem in the module tag area. With profiling >> toggled off, the overflow check in reserve_module_tags() did not >> run, a module could load with more tags than the page flags can >> address, and re-enabling profiling then silently corrupted >> /proc/allocinfo. On overflow the fix shuts profiling down, releases >> the reservation and returns -EAGAIN, and the codetag section lands >> as regular module data in the same load, so the module loads without >> profiling. >> >> Review of the earlier series by Sashiko turned up two more problems. > > Thanks. Sashiko had a lot more to say, as I assume you've seen: > https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/[email protected] > Thanks. Initially I was confused why Sashiko didn't review this patch on top of mm‑new. Some of the issues Sashiko reported have already been fixed in mm‑new. I checked my old reviews and saw other mm‑module patches were using mm‑new. That makes me wonder if cross‑module changes follow a different baseline. No big deal, Sashiko did find two valid problems. > Also, "Based-on-a-patch-by:" isn't a recognized thing, although it's > been used ~30 times in the past. > > I'm ambivalent about ad-hoc invention of new tags, although it happens > a lot. Perhaps it would be better to do > > > Based on a patch by Petr Pavlu [1]. > ... > Link: ... [1] > > ? OK, will do for the next version. Thanks Best Regards Hao
