From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from e33.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.151]:39455 "EHLO e33.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751032AbaIUNZ3 (ORCPT ); Sun, 21 Sep 2014 09:25:29 -0400 Received: from /spool/local by e33.co.us.ibm.com with IBM ESMTP SMTP Gateway: Authorized Use Only! Violators will be prosecuted for from ; Sun, 21 Sep 2014 07:25:29 -0600 Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 06:25:12 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Joe Perches Cc: Steven Rostedt , Omar Sandoval , Chris Mason , Josef Bacik , linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, Josh Triplett , Mathieu Desnoyers , Lai Jiangshan , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Return a value from printk_ratelimited Message-ID: <20140921132512.GI4723@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <3629aa32fd3e434e41e5e5f4a97ab50adb8edcdc.1411116672.git.osandov@osandov.com> <20140919132123.418b276f@gandalf.local.home> <1411150553.24444.29.camel@joe-AO725> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1411150553.24444.29.camel@joe-AO725> Sender: linux-btrfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 11:15:53AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > On Fri, 2014-09-19 at 13:21 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 02:01:29 -0700 > > Omar Sandoval wrote: > > > > > printk returns an integer; there's no reason for printk_ratelimited to swallow > > > it. > > Except for the lack of usefulness of the return value itself. > See: https://lkml.org/lkml/2009/10/7/275 When printk()'s return value is changed to void, then yes, we should clearly change this code to match that. So, I have to ask... What happened to the patch later in that series that was to remove the uses of the printk() return value? Thanx, Paul