On Fri 28-06-24 16:09:02, xiujianfeng wrote: > > > On 2024/6/28 15:45, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Fri 28-06-24 07:23:33, Xiu Jianfeng wrote: > >> Currently it uses WARN_ON_ONCE() if seq_buf overflows when user reads > >> memory.stat, the only advantage of WARN_ON_ONCE is that the splat is > >> so verbose that it gets noticed. And also it panics the system if > >> panic_on_warn is enabled. It seems like the warning is just an over > >> reaction and a simple pr_warn should just achieve the similar effect. > >> > >> Suggested-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Xiu Jianfeng <xiujianfeng@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Acked-by: Michal Hocko <mhocko@xxxxxxxx> > > > > I would just squash this with other patch removing it from > > memcg_stat_format. But this is up to you. > > Sorry, I might have misunderstood, if you can squash them, it looks good > to me, thanks. Andrew usually can do that even when the patch is in his tree. But as I've said having 2 patches is ok as well. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs
