On 7/19/24 11:33 AM, Michal Hocko wrote: > On Fri 19-07-24 10:50:07, Vlastimil Babka wrote: > [...] >> That wouldn't mean the busy loop is a correct and supported practice. It >> would just mean it's the least bad of the bad options we have to deal with >> an allocation that's wrong but we didn't catch soon enough in the development. > > So you want to make those potential BUG_ONs hard/soft lockups (not sure > all arches have a reliable detection) instead? I'd expect on a SMP machine there's fair chance of being rescued by kswapd or other direct reclaimer.
