I'd like to use printk_ratelimit() in atomic context, but that's
not possible right now due to the spinlock usage this commit
introduced more than a year ago:
717115e: printk ratelimiting rewrite
As a first step push the lock into the ratelimit state structure.
This allows us to deal with locking failures to be considered as an
event related to that state being too busy.
Also clean up the code a bit (without changing functionality):
- tidy up the definitions
- clean up the code flow
This also shrinks the code a tiny bit:
text data bss dec hex filename
264 0 4 268 10c ratelimit.o.before
255 0 0 255 ff ratelimit.o.after
( Whole-kernel data size got a bit larger, because we have
two ratelimit-state data structures right now. )
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
LKML-Reference: <new-submission>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
It mistakenly assumes that a static local in an inlined function is a
kernel-wide singleton. It also has no callers, so let's remove it.
Cc: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
All ratelimit user use same jiffies and burst params, so some messages
(callbacks) will be lost.
For example:
a call printk_ratelimit(5 * HZ, 1)
b call printk_ratelimit(5 * HZ, 1) before the 5*HZ timeout of a, then b will
will be supressed.
- rewrite __ratelimit, and use a ratelimit_state as parameter. Thanks for
hints from andrew.
- Add WARN_ON_RATELIMIT, update rcupreempt.h
- remove __printk_ratelimit
- use __ratelimit in net_ratelimit
Signed-off-by: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
Cc: Dave Young <hidave.darkstar@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>