From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0798C43387 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 01:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9289521852 for ; Wed, 19 Dec 2018 01:50:08 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Jrxo5pCo" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727884AbeLSBrE (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2018 20:47:04 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-f193.google.com ([209.85.215.193]:42473 "EHLO mail-pg1-f193.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727766AbeLSBrD (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Dec 2018 20:47:03 -0500 Received: by mail-pg1-f193.google.com with SMTP id d72so8670591pga.9 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:47:02 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=8kD6cyP/Yz34GPRRH9k/hxKKfUdquCjTD7Rsnl/hgoI=; b=Jrxo5pCoIxYnnIhXMkapTJyEYhdcKSeTbnC2CWAwtJKfPlnxjsb8PIUX5FQEFglMZt 9ShNwEpdsGG7CtUTYTiCDyyfTn6E/iQmZMi43+xtOe3JaPOrRR7BitT7A9cToJQ0lWfF yJUa5YbbA37jqB3aDCLztRutIh/OIbsiKiflDkune7qQLHDpqe4eLjy2qqqf6VOOPXs2 rZvwsKnnRACd+pesLHfg46FQtPyfK4t68aBd8vTPShAMGmC7AaY412ObQEVXhK7/wsN9 7JnJAJfiF+7cR3iUFoMBzx82Ns1k3VyC3Myp+WbVOnQbe+6UfhV06h0H0rK9pYwrbXtR 7Qqw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=8kD6cyP/Yz34GPRRH9k/hxKKfUdquCjTD7Rsnl/hgoI=; b=eIF7nsaGrzTZhk4NlugYodLhClGqf3CredpmXxbyq43qouHgkX1HUadfY1KXWzk2jh S+L0MdkjqiTLSATxaI+WrR336N2WUru2Qt3of6a2Mc3T1l/9U7SXuLFcW0JmrJRudGpJ nK86m1iXNsb3YK/d46N7y/iuVjmRhznX345KvG2bZ+dz1AMzfw+q3Cr+DFG/+CdRcYi3 8Qxtg1vJwXpZgGDSr8WIrf5nCjcXEoQT6jx1UlO8mJIaP2wbifhnZGSi2HKG1Sertj7c FrYcoMIsoX2/Nx65PJXvn1UZGdmt1uQOTqYDMjYnHRc4e4iAEeiJ7wa935KiV0gyPLua vMvg== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWZNpyqp1ArK8TLKkJJVtl7HA9ejsiZJ3YzFYHJoCNgop1Hn1BuR 9hOMkEZd66cpYE/1FcWZJak= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/WzVIO49eenKbZCKABTe36huh+9kZhWamzDGHpp3n0B7Kgyz63D0geYPUJ2yo9imXRbS2AxMw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:ae01:: with SMTP id q1mr17318544pgf.402.1545184022203; Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:47:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([175.223.26.207]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t13sm24257014pgr.42.2018.12.18.17.47.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:47:00 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2018 10:46:57 +0900 From: Sergey Senozhatsky To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky , Sergey Senozhatsky , Peter Zijlstra , Petr Mladek , Steven Rostedt , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] printk: increase devkmsg write() ratelimit Message-ID: <20181219014657.GA3720@jagdpanzerIV> References: <20181218111701.GA32522@jagdpanzerIV> <20181218114709.GF7485@zn.tnic> <20181218130750.GA665@tigerII.localdomain> <20181218142623.GH7485@zn.tnic> <20181218145558.GD665@tigerII.localdomain> <20181218150313.GI7485@zn.tnic> <20181218151455.GE665@tigerII.localdomain> <20181218152413.GJ7485@zn.tnic> <20181218165217.GA534@tigerII.localdomain> <20181218174723.GK7485@zn.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181218174723.GK7485@zn.tnic> User-Agent: Mutt/1.11.1 (2018-12-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On (12/18/18 18:47), Borislav Petkov wrote: > So how much is not strict? > > And what happens if you raise that ratelimiting level and the *one* line > which is most important for debugging an issue Like you said, for debugging devkmsg=off works just fine. I don't mind the ratelimiting and want to keep it; I just don't want errors to be ratelimited. > All I'm saying is, gradually raising the limit is the wrong approach > - there will always be a case where something important doesn't get > logged. Well, OK. > What we need is a different solution, maybe what Rostedt proposes or > so... Sure, a different approach and idea are welcome. This is RFC thread. -ss