On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 08:40:07AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > Hi Alan, > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:02 PM, Alan Stern <st...@rowland.harvard.edu> wrote: > > On Wed, 6 Dec 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >> >>> Does the existing memory allocation error message include the > >> >>> &udev->dev device name and driver name? If it doesn't, there will be > >> >>> no way for the user to tell that the error message is related to the > >> >>> device failure. > >> >> > >> >> No, but the effect is similar. > >> >> > >> >> OOM does a dump_stack() so this function's call tree is shown. > >> > > >> > A call stack doesn't tell you which device was being handled. > >> > >> Do you find a default Linux allocation failure report insufficient then? > >> > >> Would you like to to achieve that the requested information can be > >> determined > >> from a backtrace? > > > > It is not practical to do this. The memory allocation routines do not > > for what purpose the memory is being allocated; hence when a failure > > occurs they cannot tell what device (or other part of the system) will > > be affected. > > If even allocation of 24 bytes fails, lots of other devices and other parts of > the system will start failing really soon... >
Small allocations never fail in the current kernel. regards, dan carpenter -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
