From: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@kernel.org>
To: Quchaosheng <quchaosheng000406@163.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>, Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>,
Valentin Schneider <vschneid@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] kthread: Report cpumask allocation failure without warning
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 16:47:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqv9nYRtwcTkJJ64@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260917092116.388262-1-quchaosheng000406@163.com>
Le Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 05:21:16PM +0800, Quchaosheng a écrit :
> Hi Frederic,
>
> Thanks for looking at it.
>
> You are right that pr_warn_once() is easy to miss, and that this matters
> least at boot under memory pressure. The case I was worried about is the
> WARN itself: __warn() taints the kernel and calls check_panic_on_warn(), so
> on a box running panic_on_warn=1 a recoverable allocation failure turns
> into a panic.
panic_on_warn=1 can be useful for debugging but I doubt it's ever a good
idea on production though.
> That said, the allocation is GFP_KERNEL on a path that runs
> once per thread and almost always at boot, so if you would rather keep the
> warning as it is, I am fine with that. It is your call and I will not push
> it further.
>
> Two things I should mention, since you are the maintainer here:
Well I'm not exactly a kthread maintainer, though we all care about that file
and I can do a pull request when necessary, so I'm just giving my opinion here:
I would rather keep the warning because when that allocation fails, something
bad happens that is unrecoverable and that's what warnings are for.
>
> 1. I am not going to re-send this. Waiman said the patch looked good to
> him, but you are the one who would take it, and "mildly convinced" is
> not an ack. If you want a revision with the message kept as WARN, say so
> and I will send one; otherwise please just drop it.
I don't think it's a necessary change but let's see if others have different
opinions.
>
> 2. This was prepared with an LLM coding assistant and should have carried
> an "Assisted-by: LLM" tag per
> Documentation/process/coding-assistants.rst. It did not, and I am adding
> the tag on anything I send from now on.
Ah yes please! It's useful for us to know that when we review.
> Sorry for the extra round trip.
No problem, iterations is how we work :-)
Thanks.
--
Frederic Weisbecker
SUSE Labs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-17 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-15 1:42 Quchaosheng
2026-09-16 12:56 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2026-09-17 9:21 ` Quchaosheng
2026-09-17 14:47 ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aqv9nYRtwcTkJJ64@localhost.localdomain \
--to=frederic@kernel.org \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=quchaosheng000406@163.com \
--cc=vschneid@redhat.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®