RE: printk_ratelimit and net_ratelimit conflict and tunablebehavior

[Joe Perches]

On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 17:49 -0600, Hawkes Steve-FSH016 wrote:
> Are you saying the few lines of code to handle changes to the tunables
> aren't worth keeping?

Yes.

I think the tunables, if needed at all, should be set by modifying
the struct and the call might as well be:
	
bool __printk_ratelimit(struct printk_ratelimit_state *state)

Another quibble is not directed to your change because it's
preexisting but "tok" isn't a good name and may not even need
to be in the structure.  It does save a multiply though.

I think that anything that attempts a printk is slow path
so it doesn't matter much though.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/