On Wed, 7 May 2014, Andrew Morton wrote: > > When the slab or slub allocators cannot allocate additional slab pages, > > they > > emit diagnostic information to the kernel log such as current number of > > slabs, > > number of objects, active objects, etc. This is always coupled with a page > > allocation failure warning since it is controlled by !__GFP_NOWARN. > > > > Suppress this out of memory warning if the allocator is configured without > > debug > > supported. The page allocation failure warning will indicate it is a > > failed > > slab allocation, so this is only useful to diagnose allocator bugs. > > > > Since CONFIG_SLUB_DEBUG is already enabled by default for the slub > > allocator, > > there is no functional change with this patch. If debug is disabled, > > however, > > the warnings are now suppressed. > > > > I'm not seeing any reason for making this change. >
You think the spam in http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=139927773010514 is meaningful? It also looks like two different errors when in reality it is a single allocation. Unless you're debugging a slab issue, all the pertinent information is already available in the page allocation failure warning emitted by the page allocator: we already have the order and gfp mask. We also know it's a slab allocation because of the __kmalloc in the call trace. Does this user care about that there are 207 slabs on node 0 with 207 objects? Probably only if they are diagnosing a slab problem. > > @@ -1621,11 +1621,17 @@ __initcall(cpucache_init); > > static noinline void > > slab_out_of_memory(struct kmem_cache *cachep, gfp_t gfpflags, int nodeid) > > { > > +#if DEBUG > > struct kmem_cache_node *n; > > struct page *page; > > unsigned long flags; > > int node; > > > > + if (gfpflags & __GFP_NOWARN) > > + return; > > + if (!printk_ratelimit()) > > + return; > > printk_ratelimit() is lame - it uses a single global state. So if > random net driver is using printk_ratelimit(), that driver and slab > will interfere with each other. > Agreed, but it is a testiment to the uselessness of this information already. The page allocation failure warnings are controlled by their own ratelimiter, nopage_rs, but that's local to the page allocator. Do you prefer that all these ratelimiters be moved to the global namespace for generic use? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
