Re: [PATCH] kernel.h: Add printk_ratelimited and pr_<level>_rl

[Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>]

* Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:

> On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 13:49 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:21:47 -0700
> > Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> wrote:
> > > +#define pr_emerg_rl(fmt, ...) \
> > > +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_EMERG pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
> > > +#define pr_alert_rl(fmt, ...) \
> > > +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_ALERT pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
> > > +#define pr_crit_rl(fmt, ...) \
> > > +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_CRIT pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
> > > +#define pr_err_rl(fmt, ...) \
> > > +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_ERR pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
> > > +#define pr_warning_rl(fmt, ...) \
> > > +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_WARNING pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
> > > +#define pr_notice_rl(fmt, ...) \
> > > +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
> > > +#define pr_info_rl(fmt, ...) \
> > > +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_INFO pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
> > 
> > Would prefer pr_emerg_ratelimited personally.  It's longer, but one
> > doesn't ask "wtf does _rl" mean and it avoids having two identifiers
> > which refer to the same thing.
> 
> I don't have a strong opinion either way.
> _rl is shorter and that has some value.
> 
> I think pr_crit_rl, pr_emerg_rl and pr_alert_rl likely
> aren't useful.  Is there a sensible use case for those?
> 
> I added them for completeness, but...

Yes, we want it for API completeness mostly.

	Ingo