On Tue, 02 Jun 2026 21:55:40 +0000 Lisa Wang <[email protected]> wrote:
> Here's a fourth revision to fix MF_DELAYED handling on memory failure.
>
> This patch series addresses an issue in the memory failure handling path
> where MF_DELAYED is incorrectly treated as an error. This issue was
> discovered while testing memory failure handling for guest_memfd.
Please include a description of the userspace-visible effects of the issue?
> The proposed solution involves -
> 1. Clarifying the definition of MF_DELAYED to mean that memory failure
> handling is only partially completed, and that the metadata for the
> memory that failed (as in struct page/folio) is still referenced.
> 2. Updating shmem’s handling to align with the clarified definition.
> 3. Updating how the result of .error_remove_folio() is interpreted.
Thanks. I'll take no action at this time - it's late in the cycle and we
lack review.
For some reason Sashiko wasn't able to apply this series to the various
branches which it attempts. Click on the "baseline" thingy at
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260602-memory-failure-mf-delayed-fix-v4-0-a5bc7db5a...@google.com
to see what it tried to apply this to.
