Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH] drm/print: Add drm_dbg_ratelimited

[John Harrison <john.c.harrison@intel.com>]

On 10/9/2023 12:43, Andi Shyti wrote:
> Hi John,
>
>>>> From: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
>>>>
>>>> Add a function for ratelimitted debug print.
>>>>
>>>> Cc: Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@linux.intel.com>
>>>> Cc: Maxime Ripard <mripard@kernel.org>
>>>> Cc: Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@suse.de>
>>>> Cc: David Airlie <airlied@gmail.com>
>>>> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld@intel.com>
>>>> Reviewed-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nirmoy Das <nirmoy.das@intel.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@linux.intel.com>
>>> Just a kind reminder!
>>>
>>> This is the second time this patch has been sent and we have seen
>>> some potential use of the drm_dbg_ratelimited().
>> But this patch does not actually add a user. So it is dead code at this
>> point, which is not allowed.
>>
>> If you have code that wants to use such a helper then the helper should be
>> part of the patch that adds that code.
> this is the kind of "Argh! If I had it!" patch. At the 3/4th
> "Argh! If I had it!" then you decide to send it but don't
> remember for which case you needed it.
But you should have sent it on the 1st patch set that wanted it.

And if you have code already merged that would benefit from it, then 
update that code to use it and post that as a patch together with this 
implementation.

And note that if your code is GT related, then it should use 
gt_dbg_ratelimited not drm_dbg_ratelimited.

John.


>
> I'm sure that once this goes in won't be long until poeple will
> start using it. In any case, if it doesn't go in I will keep it
> ready until the case comes.
>
> Andi