[PATCH 8/8] arch/x86: use printk_ratelimited instead of printk_ratelimit

[PATCH 8/8] arch/x86: use printk_ratelimited instead of printk_ratelimit

[Christian Dietrich]

Since printk_ratelimit() shouldn't be used anymore (see comment in
include/linux/printk.h), replace it with printk_ratelimited.

Signed-off-by: Christian Dietrich <christian.dietrich@informatik.uni-erlangen.de>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c |    6 +++---
 arch/x86/kernel/irq.c  |    9 ++++-----
 arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c   |    7 +++----
 arch/x86/lguest/boot.c |    6 +++---
 4 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c b/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
index 6781765..800d01b 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/hpet.c
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
 #include <linux/cpu.h>
 #include <linux/pm.h>
 #include <linux/io.h>
+#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
 
 #include <asm/fixmap.h>
 #include <asm/i8253.h>
@@ -1158,9 +1159,8 @@ static void hpet_rtc_timer_reinit(void)
 	if (lost_ints) {
 		if (hpet_rtc_flags & RTC_PIE)
 			hpet_pie_count += lost_ints;
-		if (printk_ratelimit())
-			printk(KERN_WARNING "hpet1: lost %d rtc interrupts\n",
-				lost_ints);
+		printk_ratelimited("hpet1: lost %d rtc interrupts\n",
+				   lost_ints);
 	}
 }
 
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
index 6c0802e..435bf12 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
 #include <linux/smp.h>
 #include <linux/ftrace.h>
 #include <linux/delay.h>
+#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
 
 #include <asm/apic.h>
 #include <asm/io_apic.h>
@@ -28,8 +29,7 @@ void (*x86_platform_ipi_callback)(void) = NULL;
  */
 void ack_bad_irq(unsigned int irq)
 {
-	if (printk_ratelimit())
-		pr_err("unexpected IRQ trap at vector %02x\n", irq);
+	pr_err_ratelimited("unexpected IRQ trap at vector %02x\n", irq);
 
 	/*
 	 * Currently unexpected vectors happen only on SMP and APIC.
@@ -188,9 +188,8 @@ unsigned int __irq_entry do_IRQ(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	if (!handle_irq(irq, regs)) {
 		ack_APIC_irq();
 
-		if (printk_ratelimit())
-			pr_emerg("%s: %d.%d No irq handler for vector (irq %d)\n",
-				__func__, smp_processor_id(), vector, irq);
+		pr_emerg_ratelimited("%s: %d.%d No irq handler for vector (irq %d)\n",
+				     __func__, smp_processor_id(), vector, irq);
 	}
 
 	irq_exit();
diff --git a/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c b/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
index 19fe855..8e26193 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kvm/i8259.c
@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@
 #include <linux/mm.h>
 #include <linux/slab.h>
 #include <linux/bitops.h>
+#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
 #include "irq.h"
 
 #include <linux/kvm_host.h>
@@ -473,8 +474,7 @@ static int picdev_write(struct kvm_io_device *this,
 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 
 	if (len != 1) {
-		if (printk_ratelimit())
-			printk(KERN_ERR "PIC: non byte write\n");
+		printk_ratelimited(KERN_ERR "PIC: non byte write\n");
 		return 0;
 	}
 	pic_lock(s);
@@ -503,8 +503,7 @@ static int picdev_read(struct kvm_io_device *this,
 		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
 
 	if (len != 1) {
-		if (printk_ratelimit())
-			printk(KERN_ERR "PIC: non byte read\n");
+		printk_ratelimited(KERN_ERR "PIC: non byte read\n");
 		return 0;
 	}
 	pic_lock(s);
diff --git a/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c b/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
index db832fd..23a6eff 100644
--- a/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
+++ b/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
@@ -56,6 +56,7 @@
 #include <linux/lguest_launcher.h>
 #include <linux/virtio_console.h>
 #include <linux/pm.h>
+#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
 #include <asm/apic.h>
 #include <asm/lguest.h>
 #include <asm/paravirt.h>
@@ -927,9 +928,8 @@ static int lguest_clockevent_set_next_event(unsigned long delta,
 	/* FIXME: I don't think this can ever happen, but James tells me he had
 	 * to put this code in.  Maybe we should remove it now.  Anyone? */
 	if (delta < LG_CLOCK_MIN_DELTA) {
-		if (printk_ratelimit())
-			printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s: small delta %lu ns\n",
-			       __func__, delta);
+		printk_ratelimited(KERN_DEBUG "%s: small delta %lu ns\n",
+				   __func__, delta);
 		return -ETIME;
 	}
 
-- 
1.7.1

Re: [PATCH 8/8] arch/x86: use printk_ratelimited instead of printk_ratelimit

[Rusty Russell]

On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 17:37:04 +0200, Christian Dietrich <christian.dietrich@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> wrote:
> Since printk_ratelimit() shouldn't be used anymore (see comment in
> include/linux/printk.h), replace it with printk_ratelimited.

Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (lguest part)

> diff --git a/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c b/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
> index db832fd..23a6eff 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
> @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@
>  #include <linux/lguest_launcher.h>
>  #include <linux/virtio_console.h>
>  #include <linux/pm.h>
> +#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
>  #include <asm/apic.h>
>  #include <asm/lguest.h>
>  #include <asm/paravirt.h>

Is this new include really needed?  The printk_ratelimited() definition
is in printk.h...

Thanks,
Rusty.

Re: [PATCH 8/8] arch/x86: use printk_ratelimited instead of printk_ratelimit

[richard -rw- weinberger]

On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 17:37:04 +0200, Christian Dietrich <christian.dietrich@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> wrote:
>> Since printk_ratelimit() shouldn't be used anymore (see comment in
>> include/linux/printk.h), replace it with printk_ratelimited.
>
> Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (lguest part)
>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c b/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
>> index db832fd..23a6eff 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
>> @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@
>>  #include <linux/lguest_launcher.h>
>>  #include <linux/virtio_console.h>
>>  #include <linux/pm.h>
>> +#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
>>  #include <asm/apic.h>
>>  #include <asm/lguest.h>
>>  #include <asm/paravirt.h>
>
> Is this new include really needed?  The printk_ratelimited() definition
> is in printk.h...

Yes.
printk_ratelimited() needs DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE() which is defined
in ratelimit.h.

-- 
Thanks,
//richard

Re: [PATCH 8/8] arch/x86: use printk_ratelimited instead of printk_ratelimit

[Rusty Russell]

On Mon, 6 Jun 2011 10:11:53 +0200, richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> wrote:
> > On Sat, 4 Jun 2011 17:37:04 +0200, Christian Dietrich <christian.dietrich@informatik.uni-erlangen.de> wrote:
> >> Since printk_ratelimit() shouldn't be used anymore (see comment in
> >> include/linux/printk.h), replace it with printk_ratelimited.
> >
> > Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (lguest part)
> >
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c b/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
> >> index db832fd..23a6eff 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/lguest/boot.c
> >> @@ -56,6 +56,7 @@
> >>  #include <linux/lguest_launcher.h>
> >>  #include <linux/virtio_console.h>
> >>  #include <linux/pm.h>
> >> +#include <linux/ratelimit.h>
> >>  #include <asm/apic.h>
> >>  #include <asm/lguest.h>
> >>  #include <asm/paravirt.h>
> >
> > Is this new include really needed?  The printk_ratelimited() definition
> > is in printk.h...
> 
> Yes.
> printk_ratelimited() needs DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE() which is defined
> in ratelimit.h.

Yech.  I'm assuming that making printk.h include ratelimit.h makes a
nasty mess?

Thanks,
Rusty.
_______________________________________________
Lguest mailing list
Lguest@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/lguest

Re: [PATCH 8/8] arch/x86: use printk_ratelimited instead of printk_ratelimit

[Joe Perches]

On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 12:41 +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Jun 2011 10:11:53 +0200, richard -rw- weinberger <richard.weinberger@gmail.com> wrote:
> > printk_ratelimited() needs DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE() which is defined
> > in ratelimit.h.
> Yech.  I'm assuming that making printk.h include ratelimit.h makes a
> nasty mess?

Yup.

I proposed moving the <foo>_ratelimited dclarations to
ratelimited.h without any comment.

http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/18/377