From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx185.postini.com [74.125.245.185]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B490F6B0002 for ; Fri, 1 Mar 2013 05:15:06 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-pb0-f45.google.com with SMTP id ro8so1665032pbb.18 for ; Fri, 01 Mar 2013 02:15:06 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 02:15:04 -0800 (PST) From: David Rientjes Subject: Re: + mm-show_mem-suppress-page-counts-in-non-blockable-contexts.patch added to -mm tree In-Reply-To: <20130301095716.GA21443@dhcp22.suse.cz> Message-ID: References: <20130228231025.9F11A5A410E@corp2gmr1-2.hot.corp.google.com> <20130301095716.GA21443@dhcp22.suse.cz> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Michal Hocko Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, mm-commits@vger.kernel.org, dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mgorman@suse.de, linux-mm@kvack.org, LKML On Fri, 1 Mar 2013, Michal Hocko wrote: > I have already asked about it in the original thread but didn't get any > answer. How can we get a soft lockup when all implementations of show_mem > call touch_nmi_watchdog? > Feel free to do s/soft lockups/irqs being disabled for an extremely long time/. > I do agree with the change but the above justification seems misleading. > Can we just remove the information because it is costly and doesn't give > us anything relevant to debug allocation failures? > I believe I have already said yes, that all pertinent information is already there and I do not believe this additional information continuously spewed to the kernel log is helpful in debugging VM issues or understanding why the oom condition exists. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org