[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140619210031.GN4904@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 14:00:31 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, benoit.taine@...6.fr,
romanov.arya@...il.com, bobby.prani@...il.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] checkpatch: Attempt to find unnecessary 'out of
memory' messages
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 12:49:42PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-06-18 at 12:33 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 11:51:41AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > On Sat, 14 Jun 2014, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > With a semantic patch that searches for the various calls and then a
> > > > string containing the letters "emory", I get removals of the messages
> > > > below. Do any of these messages look useful? For example, some are
> > > > generated with specific functions, such as IRDA_ERROR or BT_ERR. If none
> > > > of the messages look useful, should just one big patch go to trivial, or
> > > > should the patches go to the individual maintainers?
> > >
> > > Sorry, I left out all the strings...
> >
> > I would like the rcu-torture message to stay:
> >
> > > - pr_err("rcu-torture: Out of memory, need: %d", size);
> >
> > This is in a module that is not loaded into any reasonable production
> > kernel, and has helped me to catch typos.
>
> I believe the function doesn't work well.
>
> static void
> rcu_torture_stats_print(void)
> {
> int size = nr_cpu_ids * 200 + 8192;
> char *buf;
>
> buf = kmalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> if (!buf) {
> pr_err("rcu-torture: Out of memory, need: %d\n", size);
> return;
> }
> rcu_torture_printk(buf);
> pr_alert("%s", buf);
> kfree(buf);
> }
>
> rcu_torture_printk simply fills buf
>
> btw: I believe the arguments should pass size and
> rcu_torture_printk should use snprintf/size
>
> but all printks are limited to a maximum of 1024
> bytes so the large allocation is senseless and
> would even if it worked, would likely need to be
> vmalloc/vfree
Fair point!
Pranith, Romanov, if you would like part of RCU that is less touchy
about random hacking, this would be a good place to start. Scripts in
tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin do care about some of the format,
but the variable-length portion generated by cur_ops->stats() is as far
as I know only parsed by human eyes.
Thanx, Paul
--
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