[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180110140408.GY3668920@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 06:04:08 -0800
From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@...il.com>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.SAKURA.ne.jp>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCHv6 00/12] printk: introduce printing kernel thread
Hello, Steven.
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 02:18:27AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> My point is, that your test is only hammering at a single CPU. You say
> it is the scenario you see, which means that the OOM is printing out
> more than it should, because if it prints it out once, it should not
> print it out again for the same process, or go into a loop doing it
> over and over on a single CPU. That would be a bug in the
> implementation.
That's not what's happening. You're not actually reading what I'm
writing. Can you please go back and re-read the scenario I've been
describing over and over again.
Thanks.
--
tejun
Powered by blists - more mailing lists