linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] memcg: use seq_buf_do_printk() with mem_cgroup_print_oom

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:   Thu, 27 Apr 2023 09:55:25 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>
Cc:     Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@...gle.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Muchun Song <muchun.song@...ux.dev>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@...omium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>, Chris Li <chrisl@...nel.org>,
        cgroups@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] memcg: use seq_buf_do_printk() with
 mem_cgroup_print_oom_meminfo()

On (23/04/26 17:24), Michal Hocko wrote:
> No objection from me but is it possible that more printk calls (one per
> line with this change correct?) would add a contention on the printk
> path?

It probably will have opposite effect: console->write of longer lines
keep local IRQs disabled longer and keep console_waiter printk spinning
(in console_trylock_spinning()) longer.