Neil Horman [off-list ref] wrote:

I'm not sure I agree with that.  Generally speaking it seems like the right
thing to do, if you want to avoid filling logs with warnings, but this is the
sort of error that is going to be accompanied by severe service interruption.
I'd rather see a reason behind that in the logs, than just have it occur
silently.

Its not silent -- the setsockopt call will fail and userspace should
display an error.

So I agree with Marcelo, lets suppress the oom spew here.