Re: [PATCH 0/4] mm: Fix page-table teardown during memory hot-remove

[Dave Hansen]

On 10/8/26 00:30, Muchun Song wrote:
> This series is limited to bug fixes for the existing teardown paths.

Why is this a series? Why not send the architectures independently? Is
there some dependency where they all need to be applied at once? What do
you want done with this series? Are you expecting it to be merged via
the mm path or the individual arch maintainers?