From: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
To: Francois Romieu <romieu@fr.zoreil.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@realtek.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: remove not needed net_ratelimit() check
Date: Sat, 3 Sep 2022 18:10:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <86fd2d55-4fc3-f242-a427-7a7164f44f46@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YxNw/6qh5gwWZH7N@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com>
On 03.09.2022 17:21, Francois Romieu wrote:
> Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com> :
>> We're not in a hot path and don't want to miss this message,
>> therefore remove the net_ratelimit() check.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@gmail.com>
>
> There had historically been some user push against excess "spam"
> messages, even when systems are able to stand a gazillion of phy
> generated messages - resources constrained systems may not - due
> to dysfunctionning hardware or externally triggered events.
>
> Things may have changed though.
>
I don't have a strong opinion here and would follow the net
maintainers decision. I looked at a few other drivers and none of
them protects link up/down messages. If also other network-related
components print a message on link-up, then we might miss the
PHY message due to the network-global nature of net_ratelimit().
In general newer drivers don't seem to use net_ratelimit()
extensively, even though that's not really an argument against
using it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-03 16:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-03 11:15 [PATCH net-next] r8169: remove not needed net_ratelimit() check Heiner Kallweit
2022-09-03 15:21 ` Francois Romieu
2022-09-03 16:10 ` Heiner Kallweit [this message]
2022-09-05 17:01 ` Andrew Lunn
2022-09-05 14:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=86fd2d55-4fc3-f242-a427-7a7164f44f46@gmail.com \
--to=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nic_swsd@realtek.com \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=romieu@fr.zoreil.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).