Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Thu, 27 Apr 2023 09:55:25 +0900
From:   Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>
To:     Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc:     Yosry Ahmed <yosryahmed@google.com>,
        Johannes Weiner <hannes@cmpxchg.org>,
        Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
        Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Muchun Song <muchun.song@linux.dev>,
        Sergey Senozhatsky <senozhatsky@chromium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Petr Mladek <pmladek@suse.com>, Chris Li <chrisl@kernel.org>,
        cgroups@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] memcg: use seq_buf_do_printk() with
 mem_cgroup_print_oom_meminfo()
Message-ID: <20230427005525.GF1496740@google.com>
References: <20230426133919.1342942-1-yosryahmed@google.com>
 <20230426133919.1342942-2-yosryahmed@google.com>
 <ZElCHJrkOVsy79KY@dhcp22.suse.cz>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <ZElCHJrkOVsy79KY@dhcp22.suse.cz>
Precedence: bulk

On (23/04/26 17:24), Michal Hocko wrote:
> No objection from me but is it possible that more printk calls (one per
> line with this change correct?) would add a contention on the printk
> path?

It probably will have opposite effect: console->write of longer lines
keep local IRQs disabled longer and keep console_waiter printk spinning
(in console_trylock_spinning()) longer.