From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04202C433F5 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 10:14:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 866358D0002; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 05:14:10 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 816008D0001; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 05:14:10 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 704CA8D0002; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 05:14:10 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0229.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.229]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D84F8D0001 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 05:14:10 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin23.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay04.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01987A230A for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 10:14:10 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79202664660.23.4B9A953 Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) by imf02.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71DF780019 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 10:14:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 243DF21107; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 10:14:08 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.com; s=susede1; t=1646302448; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=U8hn+K1tGTvyF5f1kaIIx3YbkP2Kix2PLC93JbSkSwA=; b=iYFyvIhFWJzafeqkx9+fNKRZuKDSbPBEA/i0TMOKUK1aPllk0+d7K8Tfl+D3iwm8/e5BW4 RgBKDKqBztOkqfV8lO1BPFfeF47Qwzp8Lc9UfhVyePkFd6hXmcyyU+In0Fyd230h+Nhqk2 rvm1rmfx4/FU10+Oytt9coDRtbl+cVk= Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F33CD13AB4; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 10:14:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id ckHSOu+UIGLBewAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Thu, 03 Mar 2022 10:14:07 +0000 Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2022 11:14:06 +0100 From: Michal =?iso-8859-1?Q?Koutn=FD?= To: Randy Dunlap Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, Igor Zhbanov , Andrew Morton , Johannes Weiner , Michal Hocko , Vladimir Davydov , cgroups@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] mm/memcontrol: return 1 from cgroup.memory __setup() handler Message-ID: <20220303101406.GE10867@blackbody.suse.cz> References: <20220222005811.10672-1-rdunlap@infradead.org> <20220302185300.GA19699@blackbody.suse.cz> <9f8d4ddb-81ce-738a-d1f7-346ff9bf8ebd@infradead.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9f8d4ddb-81ce-738a-d1f7-346ff9bf8ebd@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) X-Rspam-User: X-Rspamd-Server: rspam01 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 71DF780019 X-Stat-Signature: ufhzp6ypkmt7nwdbba4meoo1cnssadpa Authentication-Results: imf02.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=suse.com header.s=susede1 header.b=iYFyvIhF; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=suse.com; spf=pass (imf02.hostedemail.com: domain of mkoutny@suse.com designates 195.135.220.28 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mkoutny@suse.com X-HE-Tag: 1646302449-482368 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 04:53:19PM -0800, Randy Dunlap wrote: > I don't think those strings (even with invalid option values) should be > added to init's environment. Isn't mere presence of the handler sufficient to filter those out? [1] (Counter-example would be 'foo=3D1 foo=3D2' where 1 is accepted value by = the handler, 2 is unrecognized and should be passed to init. Is this a real use case?) > I'm willing to add a pr_warn() or pr_notice() for any unrecognized > option value, but it should still return 1 IMO. Regardless of the handler existence check, I see returning 1 would be consistent with the majority of other memcg handlers. For the uniformity, Reviewed-by: Michal Koutn=FD (Richer reporting or -EINVAL is by my understanding now a different problem.) Thanks, Michal