On 3/4/25 12:10 PM, Michal Koutný wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 06:52:41AM -1000, Tejun Heo <tj@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 11:19:00AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
...
I do have some concern with the use of pr_warn*() because some users may
attempt to use the panic_on_warn command line option.
Yeah, let's print these as info.
The intention is _not_ to cause panic by any of this this.
Note the difference between WARN() and pr_warn() (only the former
panics).
Warn level has precedent in mm/memcontrol-v1.c already.
I think you are right. The pr_warn() function should not cause a panic.
I have the misconception that pr_warn() will be affected by
panic_on_warn before. In that case, I have no objection to use pr_warn().
Thanks,
Longman
