linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] Refactor part of the oom report in dump

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:   Mon, 4 Jun 2018 16:57:17 +0800
From:   禹舟键 <ufo19890607@...il.com>
To:     mhocko@...nel.org
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rientjes@...gle.com,
        kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com, aarcange@...hat.com,
        penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp, guro@...com,
        yang.s@...baba-inc.com, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Wind Yu <yuzhoujian@...ichuxing.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/2] Refactor part of the oom report in dump_header

Hi Michal

> I have earlier suggested that you split this into two parts. One to add
> the missing information and the later to convert it to a single printk
> output.

I'm sorry I do not get your point.  What do you mean the missing information?

> but it still really begs an example why we really insist on a single
> printk and that should be in its own changelog.

Actually , I just know that we should avoid the interleaving messages
in the dmesg.
But I don't know how to reproduce this issue.  I think I can just
recount this issue in
the changelog.

Thanks