On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 03:19:45PM -0700, Rob Clark wrote: > um, quite.. tbf that was in the context of a WIP igt test for > shrinker which was trying to cycle thru ~2x RAM size worth of GEM > buffers on something like 72 threads. So it could just be threads > that had gotten past the dma_debug_disabled() check already before > global_disable was set to true? > > I guess this could be pr_err_once() instead, then? Yes, we could use pr_err_once to reduce the chattyness while still keeping global_disable to disable all the actual tracking.
