On Aug 8, 2010, at 21:50, Øyvind Harboe wrote: > On Sun, Aug 8, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Anders Montonen <anders.monto...@iki.fi> > wrote: >> On Aug 8, 2010, at 9:14, Øyvind Harboe wrote: >> >>> Currently OpenOCD will ignore failure to poll the target. >>> >>> This can result in a situation where errors are being spewed out. >>> >>> I am considering making a change to OpenOCD where polling >>> is automatically disabled when it fails. The user would then have >>> to manually reenable polling. >> Isn't the problem the log spam rather than the polling, i.e. wouldn't >> it be better to change the logging system not to print out the same >> message say more than once per second? > How would the "logging system" know how to tell which messages > are "spam"?
Having same message repeated tens or hundreds of times per second because the server goes bananas it is not useful to anyone, and can easily be automatically suppressed. Handling this in the logging system means it needs to be done only once instead of in every place it can happen. If you want to make the thresholds tunable it's also easier if it's handled in one place. -anders _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
