From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932544AbeAUBiE (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Jan 2018 20:38:04 -0500 Received: from smtprelay0155.hostedemail.com ([216.40.44.155]:39074 "EHLO smtprelay.hostedemail.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932124AbeAUBh4 (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Jan 2018 20:37:56 -0500 X-Session-Marker: 6A6F6540706572636865732E636F6D X-Spam-Summary: 2,0,0,,d41d8cd98f00b204,joe@perches.com,:::::::::::,RULES_HIT:41:355:379:541:599:973:988:989:1260:1277:1311:1313:1314:1345:1359:1373:1437:1515:1516:1518:1534:1539:1593:1594:1711:1730:1747:1777:1792:1981:2194:2199:2393:2553:2559:2562:2828:2892:2899:3138:3139:3140:3141:3142:3352:3622:3865:3867:3870:3871:3872:3873:3874:4250:4321:5007:6119:10004:10400:10848:11232:11658:11914:12740:12895:13069:13255:13311:13357:13439:13894:14659:21080:21212:21324:21433:21627:30012:30054:30075:30090:30091,0,RBL:none,CacheIP:none,Bayesian:0.5,0.5,0.5,Netcheck:none,DomainCache:0,MSF:not bulk,SPF:,MSBL:0,DNSBL:none,Custom_rules:0:0:0,LFtime:1,LUA_SUMMARY:none X-HE-Tag: sky61_621e30d099363 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 1771 Message-ID: <1516498672.24895.2.camel@perches.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] Intel-IOMMU: Delete an error message for a failed memory allocation in init_dmars() From: Joe Perches To: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?J=F6rg_R=F6del?= , SF Markus Elfring Cc: iommu@lists.linux-foundation.org, David Woodhouse , LKML , kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org Date: Sat, 20 Jan 2018 17:37:52 -0800 In-Reply-To: <20180120194004.GC28161@8bytes.org> References: <20180120133452.GB28161@8bytes.org> <6b452dfb-b2fc-2417-26b3-bbcdf11ed06f@users.sourceforge.net> <20180120194004.GC28161@8bytes.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.26.1-1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2018-01-20 at 20:40 +0100, Jörg Rödel wrote: > On Sat, Jan 20, 2018 at 03:55:37PM +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > Do you need any more background information for this general > > transformation pattern? > > No. > > > Do you find the Linux allocation failure report insufficient for this > > use case? > > Yes, because it can't tell me what the code was trying to allocate. While Markus' commit messages are nearly universally terrible, is there really any signficant value in knowing when any particular OOM condition occurs other than the subsystem that became OOM? You're going to be hosed in any case. Why isn't the generic OOM stack dump good enough?