On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 10:28:27PM +0100, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Thu, Aug 11, 2022 at 01:43:09PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > May I suggest going one step further, and making these WARN_ON_ONCE() instead. > > > > >From personal experience, once some scheduler bug (or task struct > > corruption) happens, ti often *keeps* happening, and the logs just > > fill up with more and more data, to the point where you lose sight of > > the original report (and the machine can even get unusable just from > > the logging). > > I've been thinking about magically turning all the WARN_ON_ONCE() into > (effectively) WARN_ON_RATELIMIT(). I had some patches in that direction > a while ago but never got round to tidying them up for submission. I often wonder if we have a justification for WARN_ON to even exist, I see a lot of pressure to make things into WARN_ON_ONCE based on the logic that spamming makes it useless.. Maybe a global limit of 10 warn ons per minute or something would be interesting? Jason
