On Fri, Jul 01, 2016 at 10:22:47AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > +/* issue num suppressed message on exit */
> > +#define RATELIMIT_MSG_ON_RELEASE BIT(0)
>
> So this flag says that we should issue a ratelimit message when it occurs.
This flag says that we should print the ratelimit message when we
release the ratelimit state, i.e., devkmsg_release() for example.
> But here we print the message if the RATELIMIT_MSG_ON_RELEASE bit is zero.
> Is that intentional?
Sure, we want to dump the ratelimited messages only when we release the
ratelimit state.
> Also, while we are changing it, I'd like to suggest a different message -
> it's
> talking about 'callbacks' but there's no callback here - we are skipping
> kernel
> log messages. So how about:
>
> pr_warn("%s: %d kernel log lines skipped, due to rate-limiting.\n"
Well, I'm not sure: even though the majority of the ratelimit usage is
printing stuff and it has been carved out from printk.c, it still is a
generic facility and you probably want to ratelimit other things too
with it, like polling for something or whatnot.
[ Whether it is really usable for something else besides ratelimiting
printk is a whole another question, of course. ]
And ___ratelimit() itself gets a function name as arg so there you
*really* *have* callbacks so %d callbacks suppressed\n" is actually
correct.
I guess I can make the RATELIMIT_MSG_ON_RELEASE message more generic:
static inline void ratelimit_state_exit(struct ratelimit_state *rs)
{
if (!(rs->flags & RATELIMIT_MSG_ON_RELEASE))
return;
if (rs->missed)
printk(KERN_WARNING "%s: %d output lines suppressed due to
ratelimiting\n",
current->comm, rs->missed);
}
?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
