Received: by 2002:a25:c593:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id v141csp127083ybe; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 18:49:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwjJ5FpgdI1FZAXBi3L8UNvShnCnVQZ2j7udUIBWGu3g7QVKSbjGg/W7AX6e3ZkbyEd2fFM X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:8302:: with SMTP id bd2mr6881037plb.9.1567734564553; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 18:49:24 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1567734564; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=tVUKHJ7AO+hS3wrvJi/wQYg3QjcPcG+elxJun30CzXs4Yx6ob9xLD2lXSFiIQY/s24 djuHkIHQz5XXPEl4Je7IcZuM2fiaTYFFYTaKY+nBjdOjtMPu3d9RRNwxqMalubepRLhJ LX/QLiIvEsavutIswyNoLJfFMWWBgQ3+8qEHKFdeZ/Ew5pTGtfH9Ot5tjLqBt87JvEBZ 9xJv2Rmhk6bikQPf+lTIO8k4dUWPNOcEgRkNPJmwX1qTmjqpWntP1J0SosXk4GpnAsTa 6E7Pq4SJJ/lvrp1OcR40+PLteROlF+pxBmzDCUdgCXntx9uGayZItOymM5RPWs04dgW9 VCUA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :references:in-reply-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=3+pG4MqVCPkfYN3SNlpeGcLupsfMocdg/WgyjyGOC5U=; b=TBnV/xg7+sQMhjc0byxTJCl/MZpNBI5iDrmoj3O6mEuhubqBlvCAiN0T0qqx+o6X5e FbZzqPXzl3EZX9vU0WAP04KQNPOVmxnf3/pIsPhtW/VZ1KJ9oJv/uJn4hUCWaf93v5F4 vJyuY8tMga/QETvZ/eXCcx15etif+SrywLgXsyDpdebvWA5opM2+s5Nn5q9qVmTlDEoz t7m6PdZ8YxoLc5YwxQLVm4lUs1/irzESBkZQGzWrMlfABBYB5zMThIlrSfzBAtudKnli peJQNtr849wewgy+vd+EauhrB0xqcKjIYCnCBteWasLuioUU0/9YLZbdZcDadh1QyMJK dlfg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id o18si3653399pll.302.2019.09.05.18.49.07; Thu, 05 Sep 2019 18:49:24 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390965AbfIERXo (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:23:44 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:49440 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731361AbfIERXn (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:23:43 -0400 Received: from oasis.local.home (bl11-233-114.dsl.telepac.pt [85.244.233.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 419EF20693; Thu, 5 Sep 2019 17:23:41 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 5 Sep 2019 13:23:34 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Qian Cai , Petr Mladek , Sergey Senozhatsky , Michal Hocko , Eric Dumazet , davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/skbuff: silence warnings under memory pressure Message-ID: <20190905132334.52b13d95@oasis.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20190905113208.GA521@jagdpanzerIV> References: <20190903185305.GA14028@dhcp22.suse.cz> <1567546948.5576.68.camel@lca.pw> <20190904061501.GB3838@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190904064144.GA5487@jagdpanzerIV> <20190904065455.GE3838@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190904071911.GB11968@jagdpanzerIV> <20190904074312.GA25744@jagdpanzerIV> <1567599263.5576.72.camel@lca.pw> <20190904144850.GA8296@tigerII.localdomain> <1567629737.5576.87.camel@lca.pw> <20190905113208.GA521@jagdpanzerIV> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 20:32:08 +0900 Sergey Senozhatsky wrote: > I think we can queue significantly much less irq_work-s from printk(). > > Petr, Steven, what do you think? What if we just rate limit the wake ups of klogd? I mean, really, do we need to keep calling wake up if it probably never even executed? -- Steve