| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1303010213140.23298@chino.kir.corp.google.com> 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists