From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755460Ab1HEBvB (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2011 21:51:01 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:7758 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752958Ab1HEBvA (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2011 21:51:00 -0400 Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 21:50:57 -0400 From: Dave Jones To: huang ying Cc: Linux Kernel , tom.l.nguyen@intel.com, yanmin.zhang@intel.com Subject: Re: [rfc] suppress excessive AER output Message-ID: <20110805015057.GB19434@redhat.com> Mail-Followup-To: Dave Jones , huang ying , Linux Kernel , tom.l.nguyen@intel.com, yanmin.zhang@intel.com References: <20110803223407.GA20646@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 02:45:01PM +0800, huang ying wrote: > On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Dave Jones wrote: > > I have a machine that has developed some kind of problem with > > its onboard ethernet.  It still boots, but spewed almost 1.5G of text > > (2381585 instances of the warning below) before we realised what > > was going on, and blacklisted the igb driver. > > > > Is it worth logging every single error when we're flooding like this ? > > It seems unlikely that we'll find useful information in amongst that much data > > that wasn't already in the first 100 instances. > > > > I picked 100 in the (untested) example patch below arbitarily, but the exact > > value could be smaller, or slightly bigger.. > > > > could we do something like this maybe ? > > Why not use __ratelimit to implement this feature? that would be better than the current situation probably, but my gut feeling is that there's still going to be a lot of spew. Dave