Re: [PATCH] mm: Always print RLIMIT_DATA warning

[David Woodhouse]

On Tue, 2018-02-06 at 20:48 +0300, Konstantin Khlebnikov wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 6, 2018 at 7:45 PM, David Woodhouse <dwmw@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > The documentation for ignore_rlimit_data says that it will print a warning
> > at first misuse. Yet it doesn't seem to do that. Fix the code to print
> > the warning even when we allow the process to continue.
>
> Ack. But I think this was a misprint in docs.
> Anyway, this knob is a kludge so we might warn once even if it is set.

Right. I think we definitely should. Otherwise, once set, there's no
real path to ever being able to *unset* it. Nothing well ever get
fixed.

> So, somebody still have problems with this change?
> I remember concerns about that "warn_once" isn't enough to detect
> what's going wrong.
> And probably we should inventÂÂ"warn_sometimes".

That was covered by "should probably also do what Linus suggestedâ":

> > ---
> > We should probably also do what Linus suggested in
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/9/16/585

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature