On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 11:42:37PM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 10/31, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > In some cases this can trigger a true flood of output. > > > > Requested-by: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]> > > Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <[email protected]> > > --- > > kernel/sched/core.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > --- a/kernel/sched/core.c > > +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c > > @@ -7301,7 +7301,7 @@ void __might_sleep(const char *file, int > > * since we will exit with TASK_RUNNING make sure we enter with it, > > * otherwise we will destroy state. > > */ > > - if (WARN(current->state != TASK_RUNNING, > > + if (WARN_ONCE(current->state != TASK_RUNNING, > > Agreed, but sorry for off-topic, can't resist. > > Sometimes I hate WARN_ONCE() because you can't reproduce the problem > once again without reboot.
Yes, and the fact that you can only see the first fail, even if more are present. > Perhaps WARN_ON_RATELIMIT() should be used more often (not sure about > this particular case). Or, perhaps, we can add a special section for > these "__warned" variables and add, say, sysctl which clears that > section ? Yeah, maybe, /debug/warn_once/file/line/enable or whatnot. For now I'll continue removing ONCEs whenever I feel like it though ;-) -- 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/
