Re: [PATCH 1/2] Correct __pagemap_scan_get_categories return value

[David Hildenbrand (Arm)]

On 8/6/26 21:27, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu,  6 Aug 2026 14:17:03 -0400 Audra Mitchell <audra@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
>> Currently __pagemap_scan_get_categories returns the result from the
>> ioctl call which should be an int, not uint64_t. The ioctl may
>> return -1 on error, which will be interpreted as UINT64_MAX. Adjust
>> the return type to use the correct value.
> 
> I don't know why these were resent.
> 
> It's conventional (and useful) to include a [0/N] cover letter when
> more than a single patch is being sent.  That's the place to tell us
> why a new version has been sent.

Heh, I was CCed on one, apparently Audra messed up the CC/TO list :)

> 
> And please see how people are tracking versioning infomation in the
> email subjects.
> 
> And it's nice to prepare a Subject: which identifies what part of the
> kernel is being altered.  I think the main audience here is those who
> are scanning subjects wondering "am I interested in this".
> 
> So to sum up, a good title for this patch would have been
> 
> Subject: [PATCH v1 1/2] selftests/mm: correct __pagemap_scan_get_categories return value

Yes. With that

Acked-by: David Hildenbrand (Arm) <david@xxxxxxxxxx>


Audra, I would suggest that you take a look at b4 for patch series management.

(also, don't send new revisions in reply to previous submissions)


-- 
Cheers,

David