linux-kernel - Re: + mm-show_mem-suppress-page-counts-in-non-blockable-contexts.patch added to -mm tree

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 1 Mar 2013 02:15:04 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>
To:	Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.cz>
cc:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mm-commits@...r.kernel.org,
	dave@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, mgorman@...e.de, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: + mm-show_mem-suppress-page-counts-in-non-blockable-contexts.patch
 added to -mm tree

On Fri, 1 Mar 2013, Michal Hocko wrote:

> I have already asked about it in the original thread but didn't get any
> answer. How can we get a soft lockup when all implementations of show_mem
> call touch_nmi_watchdog?
> 

Feel free to do s/soft lockups/irqs being disabled for an extremely long 
time/.

> I do agree with the change but the above justification seems misleading.
> Can we just remove the information because it is costly and doesn't give
> us anything relevant to debug allocation failures?
> 

I believe I have already said yes, that all pertinent information is 
already there and I do not believe this additional information 
continuously spewed to the kernel log is helpful in debugging VM issues or 
understanding why the oom condition exists.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/