From: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>
To: Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Lorenzo Stoakes <lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com>,
"Liam R. Howlett" <Liam.Howlett@oracle.com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>, Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>,
Suren Baghdasaryan <surenb@google.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] mm/gup: remove (VM_)BUG_ONs
Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2025 12:27:25 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <03fa1946-e02f-4bd5-96bd-e8a2f77c0807@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aEK_R93gihEn-xW6@tiehlicka>
On 06.06.25 12:13, Michal Hocko wrote:
> On Fri 06-06-25 11:01:18, David Hildenbrand wrote:
>> On 06.06.25 10:31, Michal Hocko wrote:
> [...]
>>> Turning them into VM_WARN_ON
>>> should be reasonably safe as they are not enabled in production
>>> environment anyway so we cannot really rely on those. Having them in
>>> WARN form would be still useful for debugging and those that really need
>>> a crash dump while debugging can achieve the same result.
>>
>> One question is if we should be VM_WARN_ON vs. VM_WARN_ON_ONCE ...
>
> *WARN_ONCE ha a very limited use from code paths which are generally
> shared by many callers. You just see one and then nothing. Some time ago
> we have discussed an option to have _ONCE per call trace but I haven't
> see any follow up.
While true, getting a flood of the same events is absolutely not helpful
in my experience.
Usually one cares about a single instance of any events, even if
triggered by various code paths.
Sure, there are some other cases ... which brings me back of my original
point of doing it stepwise.
>
> Anyway starting without _ONCE seems like safer option because we are not
> losing potentially useful debugging information. Afterall this is
> debugging only thing. But no strong position on my side.
Yeah.
>
>> VM_BUG_ON is essentially a "once" thing so far, but then, we don't continue
>> ... so probably most should be _ONCE.
>>
>>>
>>> So while I agree that many of them could be dropped or made more clear
>>> those could be dealt with after a mass move. An advantage of this would
>>> be that we can drop VM_BUG_ON* and stop new instances from being added.
>>
>> As a first step we could probably just #define them to go to the
>> VM_WARN_ON_* variants and see what happens.
>
> You meand VM_BUG_ON expand to VM_WARN_ON by default?
That's one approach with little churn, that still allows us easily to go
through them and re-evaluate them later as we actually remove them.
--
Cheers,
David / dhildenb
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-06 10:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 55+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-06-04 14:05 [PATCH v1] mm/gup: remove (VM_)BUG_ONs David Hildenbrand
2025-06-04 14:22 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-06-04 14:26 ` Suren Baghdasaryan
2025-06-04 14:48 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-04 14:58 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-04 15:44 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-04 15:42 ` Linus Torvalds
2025-06-04 16:05 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-04 15:14 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-04 16:01 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-04 17:25 ` SeongJae Park
2025-06-04 19:12 ` Liam R. Howlett
2025-06-04 19:16 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-05 1:07 ` John Hubbard
2025-06-05 5:37 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-06-05 6:08 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-05 8:48 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-06-05 12:29 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-05 7:10 ` Michal Hocko
2025-06-06 8:10 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-06 8:31 ` Michal Hocko
2025-06-06 9:01 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-06 10:13 ` Michal Hocko
2025-06-06 10:19 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-06 10:28 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-06 11:04 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-06 11:44 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-06 11:56 ` Michal Hocko
2025-06-06 12:12 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-06 12:17 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-06 17:57 ` John Hubbard
2025-06-06 18:06 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-06 18:15 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-06 18:21 ` John Hubbard
2025-06-06 18:23 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-06 18:31 ` John Hubbard
2025-06-06 18:36 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-06 18:39 ` John Hubbard
2025-06-06 18:34 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-06 18:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-06 18:46 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-06 19:03 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-07 13:42 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-07 13:53 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-07 18:00 ` John Hubbard
2025-06-09 9:57 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-07-24 10:54 ` Vlastimil Babka
2025-07-24 10:56 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-07-24 17:27 ` John Hubbard
2025-06-11 9:32 ` David Hildenbrand
2025-06-11 12:03 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-06-11 12:06 ` Lorenzo Stoakes
2025-06-06 10:28 ` Michal Hocko
2025-06-06 10:27 ` David Hildenbrand [this message]
2025-06-06 8:12 ` David Hildenbrand
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=03fa1946-e02f-4bd5-96bd-e8a2f77c0807@redhat.com \
--to=david@redhat.com \
--cc=Liam.Howlett@oracle.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=lorenzo.stoakes@oracle.com \
--cc=mhocko@suse.com \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=surenb@google.com \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).