Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 25 Jun 2018 10:41:22 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc:     Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com>,
        Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
        Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <sergey.senozhatsky.work@gmail.com>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@googlegroups.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: inject caller information into the body of
 message
Message-ID: <20180625014122.GB557@jagdpanzerIV>
References: <CACT4Y+ZGSefrYL9xtQs=yPMRNFsOUumuJXsShJPhCOBSLySxuw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180620083126.GA477@jagdpanzerIV>
 <CACT4Y+YMubTm1xduj+XCbQnNwQxYFLjBT33cFKisN1HyeaBpZw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180620090413.GA444@jagdpanzerIV>
 <20180620091541.GB444@jagdpanzerIV>
 <CACT4Y+bcp4fSBBq3F86T-C4+n-YkeXUGMqpvkJ6vj6mK-TU2EA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180620110759.GD444@jagdpanzerIV>
 <CACT4Y+aER3O2x2ApM=MVFoFXhp_T_rUeyG9CBx031qyH0voSRg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180620130628.GA1000@tigerII.localdomain>
 <197be25e-c841-bf3c-7081-61f0a9653c8c@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <197be25e-c841-bf3c-7081-61f0a9653c8c@i-love.sakura.ne.jp>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.0 (2018-05-17)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On (06/22/18 22:06), Tetsuo Handa wrote:
> >
> > Awesome. If you and Fengguang can combine forces and lead the
> > whole thing towards "we couldn't care of pr_cont() less", it
> > would be really huuuuuge. Go for it!
> 
> Can't we have seq_printf()-like one which flushes automatically upon seeing '\n'
> or buffer full? Printing memory information is using a lot of pr_cont(), even in
> function names (e.g. http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20180622083949.GR10465@dhcp22.suse.cz ).
> Since OOM killer code is serialized by oom_lock, we can use static buffer for
> OOM killer messages.

I'm not the right guy to answer this question. Sorry. We need to Cc MM
people on this.

Does OOM's pr_cont() usage cause too much disturbance to syzkaller? I thought
that OOM was slightly out of sight.

	-ss