linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9] 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]

Message-ID: <CAHCio2j-z5y8sQrZ9ENLH2sOzuoH=vsC+q9Nj5DbSXUnQK-uPw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 22 Jun 2018 19:40:54 +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 v9] Refactor part of the oom report in dump_header

Hi Michal
> You misunderstood my suggestion. Let me be more specific. Please
> separate the whole new oom_constraint including its _usage_.

Sorry for misunderstanding your words. I think you want me to separate
enum oom_constraint and static const char * const
oom_constraint_text[] to two parts, am I right ?
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org> 于2018年6月22日周五 下午6:42写道：
>
> On Fri 22-06-18 17:33:12, 禹舟键 wrote:
> > Hi Michal
> > > diff --git a/include/linux/oom.h b/include/linux/oom.h
> > > index 6adac113e96d..5bed78d4bfb8 100644
> > > --- a/include/linux/oom.h
> > > +++ b/include/linux/oom.h
> > > @@ -15,6 +15,20 @@ struct notifier_block;
> > >  struct mem_cgroup;
> > >  struct task_struct;
> > >
> > > +enum oom_constraint {
> > > +     CONSTRAINT_NONE,
> > > +     CONSTRAINT_CPUSET,
> > > +     CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY,
> > > +     CONSTRAINT_MEMCG,
> > > +};
> > > +
> > > +static const char * const oom_constraint_text[] = {
> > > +     [CONSTRAINT_NONE] = "CONSTRAINT_NONE",
> > > +     [CONSTRAINT_CPUSET] = "CONSTRAINT_CPUSET",
> > > +     [CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY] = "CONSTRAINT_MEMORY_POLICY",
> > > +     [CONSTRAINT_MEMCG] = "CONSTRAINT_MEMCG",
> > > +};
> >
> > > I've suggested that this should be a separate patch.
> > I've separate this part in patch v7.
> >
> > [PATCH v7 1/2] Add an array of const char and enum oom_constraint in
> > memcontrol.h
> > On Sat 02-06-18 19:58:51, ufo19890607@...il.com wrote:
> > >> From: yuzhoujian <yuzhoujian@...ichuxing.com>
> > >>
> > >> This patch will make some preparation for the follow-up patch: Refactor
> > >> part of the oom report in dump_header. It puts enum oom_constraint in
> > >> memcontrol.h and adds an array of const char for each constraint.
> >
> > > I do not get why you separate this specific part out.
> > > oom_constraint_text is not used in the patch. It is almost always
> > > preferable to have a user of newly added functionality.
> >
> > So do I need to separate this part ?
>
> You misunderstood my suggestion. Let me be more specific. Please
> separate the whole new oom_constraint including its _usage_.
> --
> Michal Hocko
> SUSE Labs