On 07/05/2016 11:14 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > On 05/07/2016 22:53, Christian Borntraeger wrote: >> Yes, this is new in next. As far as I can see, the new message would only >> appear if we would call ratelimit_state_exit. Correct? We do not call this - >> I assume this is ok? >> >> We really only want to reuse the rate limit base code (to avoid writing the >> same >> code twice) and being in lib indicated that this can indeed be used outside >> printk. >> Now: your patch 1 would allow me to get rid of the messages completely >> by setting the flag and by not calling ratelimit_state_exit. Which is >> probably >> what we should do in our code. > > Can we delay fixing this after the code is merged in Linus's tree?
Absolutely. We already have 2 smaller conflicts in next and I certainly do not want to add another one. The current ratelimit print does not hurt - it is just not necessary for us. so my statement was just a "statement of direction" to write some IBM speak ;-)
