Re: [PATCH] oom_kill: add option to disable dump_stack()

From: Aristeu Rozanski
Date: Tue Oct 27 2015 - 11:43:48 EST

Hi Michal,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 09:09:21AM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Mon 26-10-15 13:40:49, Aristeu Rozanski wrote:
> > Hi Michal,
> > On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 06:20:12PM +0100, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
> > > Would it make more sense to distinguish different parts of the OOM
> > > report by loglevel properly?
> > > pr_err - killed task report
> > > pr_warning - oom invocation + memory info
> > > pr_notice - task list
> > > pr_info - stack trace
> >
> > That'd work, yes, but I'd think the stack trace would be pr_debug. At a
> > point that you suspect the OOM killer isn't doing the right thing picking
> > up tasks and you need more information.
> Stack trace should be independent on the oom victim selection because
> the selection should be as much deterministic as possible - so it should
> only depend on the memory consumption. I do agree that the exact trace
> is not very useful for the (maybe) majority of OOM reports. I am trying
> to remember when it was really useful the last time and have trouble to
> find an example. So I would tend to agree that pr_debug would me more
> suitable.

Only problem I see so far with this approach is that it'll require
reworing show_stack() on all architectures in order to be able to pass
and use log level and I'm wondering if it's something people will find
useful for other uses.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at