Re: [PATCH] hugetlbfs: fix hugetlb page migration/fault race causing SIGBUS

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 12 Aug 2019 11:33:26 -0400 Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >I thought that absence of the Cc is the indication :P. Anyway, I really
> >do not understand why should we bother, really. I have tried to explain
> >that stable maintainers should follow Cc: stable because we bother to
> >consider that part and we are quite good at not forgetting (Thanks
> >Andrew for persistence). Sasha has told me that MM will be blacklisted
> >from automagic selection procedure.
> 
> I'll add mm/ to the ignore list for AUTOSEL patches.

Thanks, I'm OK with that.  I'll undo Fixes-no-stable.

Although I'd prefer that "akpm" was ignored, rather than "./mm/". 
Plenty of "mm" patches don't touch mm/, such as drivers/base/memory.c,
include/linux/blah, fs/, etc.  And I am diligent about considering
-stable for all the other code I look after.

This doesn't mean that I'm correct all the time, by any means - I'd
like to hear about patches which autosel thinks should be backported
but which don't include the c:stable tag.