From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH] eliminate the usage of printk_ratelimit Date: Fri, 17 Dec 2010 01:27:26 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: References: <1292408294-30584-1-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> <1292408294-30584-2-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: Received: from vms173001pub.verizon.net ([206.46.173.1]:52854 "EHLO vms173001pub.verizon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751841Ab0LQG1c (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Dec 2010 01:27:32 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([unknown] [74.104.161.234]) by vms173001.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0LDK001SX79THO84@vms173001.mailsrvcs.net> for linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 17 Dec 2010 00:27:30 -0600 (CST) In-reply-to: <1292408294-30584-2-git-send-email-gong.chen@linux.intel.com> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Chen Gong Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 15 Dec 2010, Chen Gong wrote: > To avoid messages to be suppressed, use __ratelimit to > substitute printk_ratelimit. > > Signed-off-by: Chen Gong > --- > drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c | 4 +++- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > index 51905d0..29d38ad 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/apei/ghes.c > @@ -180,13 +180,15 @@ static int ghes_copy_tofrom_phys(void *buffer, u64 paddr, u32 len, > static int ghes_read_estatus(struct ghes *ghes, int silent) > { > struct acpi_hest_generic *g = ghes->generic; > + /* Not more than 2 messages every 5 seconds */ > + static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(ratelimit, 5*HZ, 2); > u64 buf_paddr; > u32 len; > int rc; > > rc = acpi_atomic_read(&buf_paddr, &g->error_status_address); > if (rc) { > - if (!silent && printk_ratelimit()) > + if (!silent && __ratelimit(&ratelimit)) So you want to change 10 messages/5s into 2 messages/5s? That isn't a very big change. Is using ratelimit better than using printk_once()? -Len > pr_warning(FW_WARN GHES_PFX > "Failed to read error status block address for hardware error source: %d.\n", > g->header.source_id); > -- > 1.7.3.1.120.g38a18