On 08/02/2016 01:07 PM, Alexander Potapenko wrote: > On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 12:05 PM, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Andrey Ryabinin >>> >>> Why WARN? I'd suggest pr_warn_once(); >> >> >> I would suggest to just do something useful. Setting quarantine >> new_quarantine_size to 0 looks fine. >> What would user do with this warning? Number of CPUs and amount of >> memory are generally fixed. Why is it an issue for end user at all? We >> still have some quarantine per-cpu. A WARNING means a [non-critical] >> kernel bug. E.g. syzkaller will catch each and every boot of such >> system as a bug. > How about printk_once then? > Silently setting the quarantine size to zero may puzzle the user. > Nope, user will not notice anything. So keeping it silent would be better. Plus it's very unlikely that this will ever happen in real life. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>