The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
printk, it is now replaced with printk_ratelimited directly.
Suggested-by: Phillip Potter <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ghanshyam Agrawal <[email protected]>
---
V3:
Fixed the issue with my patch needing previous versions being applied
first.
Used printk_ratelimited instead of dev_warn_ratelimited because
of compiler error "incompatible pointer type".
V2:
To add KERN_WARNING in printk_ratelimited, and later as per warning by
the checkpatch script, replaced printk_ratelimited with
dev_warn_ratelimited.
V1:
The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
printk, it is now replaced with dev_warn_ratelimited.
drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
index 4e966f6bf608..98417fa31d70 100644
--- a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
+++ b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
@@ -107,8 +107,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
/*
* TODO: These stk1160_dbg are very spammy!
- * We should 1) check why we are getting them
- * and 2) add ratelimit.
+ * We should check why we are getting them.
*
* UPDATE: One of the reasons (the only one?) for getting these
* is incorrect standard (mismatch between expected and configured).
@@ -151,7 +150,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
/* Let the bug hunt begin! sanity checks! */
if (lencopy < 0) {
- stk1160_dbg("copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
+ printk_ratelimited(KERN_WARNING "copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
return;
}
--
2.25.1
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 01:07:38PM +0530, Ghanshyam Agrawal wrote:
> The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> printk, it is now replaced with printk_ratelimited directly.
>
> Suggested-by: Phillip Potter <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Ghanshyam Agrawal <[email protected]>
> ---
> V3:
> Fixed the issue with my patch needing previous versions being applied
> first.
>
> Used printk_ratelimited instead of dev_warn_ratelimited because
> of compiler error "incompatible pointer type".
>
> V2:
> To add KERN_WARNING in printk_ratelimited, and later as per warning by
> the checkpatch script, replaced printk_ratelimited with
> dev_warn_ratelimited.
>
> V1:
> The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> printk, it is now replaced with dev_warn_ratelimited.
>
> drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> index 4e966f6bf608..98417fa31d70 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> @@ -107,8 +107,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
>
> /*
> * TODO: These stk1160_dbg are very spammy!
> - * We should 1) check why we are getting them
> - * and 2) add ratelimit.
> + * We should check why we are getting them.
> *
> * UPDATE: One of the reasons (the only one?) for getting these
> * is incorrect standard (mismatch between expected and configured).
> @@ -151,7 +150,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
>
> /* Let the bug hunt begin! sanity checks! */
> if (lencopy < 0) {
> - stk1160_dbg("copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
> + printk_ratelimited(KERN_WARNING "copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
You changed a debug message level to a KERN_WARNING level? That feels
like a step backwards.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 1:18 PM Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 01:07:38PM +0530, Ghanshyam Agrawal wrote:
> > The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> > the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> > printk, it is now replaced with printk_ratelimited directly.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Phillip Potter <[email protected]>
> > Signed-off-by: Ghanshyam Agrawal <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > V3:
> > Fixed the issue with my patch needing previous versions being applied
> > first.
> >
> > Used printk_ratelimited instead of dev_warn_ratelimited because
> > of compiler error "incompatible pointer type".
> >
> > V2:
> > To add KERN_WARNING in printk_ratelimited, and later as per warning by
> > the checkpatch script, replaced printk_ratelimited with
> > dev_warn_ratelimited.
> >
> > V1:
> > The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> > the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> > printk, it is now replaced with dev_warn_ratelimited.
> >
> > drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c | 5 ++---
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > index 4e966f6bf608..98417fa31d70 100644
> > --- a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > +++ b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > @@ -107,8 +107,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
> >
> > /*
> > * TODO: These stk1160_dbg are very spammy!
> > - * We should 1) check why we are getting them
> > - * and 2) add ratelimit.
> > + * We should check why we are getting them.
> > *
> > * UPDATE: One of the reasons (the only one?) for getting these
> > * is incorrect standard (mismatch between expected and configured).
> > @@ -151,7 +150,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
> >
> > /* Let the bug hunt begin! sanity checks! */
> > if (lencopy < 0) {
> > - stk1160_dbg("copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
> > + printk_ratelimited(KERN_WARNING "copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
>
> You changed a debug message level to a KERN_WARNING level? That feels
> like a step backwards.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Hi Greg,
Thanks for your response. The log level should indeed be DEBUG
as it was earlier.
I only wanted to add a rate limit there because it was printing too
many log messages as mentioned in the todo. Shall I update the
log level to DEBUG and resend the patch? Thank you very much
again.
Regards,
Ghanshyam Agrawal
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 01:51:35PM +0530, Ghanshyam Agrawal wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 1:18 PM Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 01:07:38PM +0530, Ghanshyam Agrawal wrote:
> > > The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> > > the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> > > printk, it is now replaced with printk_ratelimited directly.
> > >
> > > Suggested-by: Phillip Potter <[email protected]>
> > > Signed-off-by: Ghanshyam Agrawal <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > > V3:
> > > Fixed the issue with my patch needing previous versions being applied
> > > first.
> > >
> > > Used printk_ratelimited instead of dev_warn_ratelimited because
> > > of compiler error "incompatible pointer type".
> > >
> > > V2:
> > > To add KERN_WARNING in printk_ratelimited, and later as per warning by
> > > the checkpatch script, replaced printk_ratelimited with
> > > dev_warn_ratelimited.
> > >
> > > V1:
> > > The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> > > the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> > > printk, it is now replaced with dev_warn_ratelimited.
> > >
> > > drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c | 5 ++---
> > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > > index 4e966f6bf608..98417fa31d70 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > > @@ -107,8 +107,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * TODO: These stk1160_dbg are very spammy!
> > > - * We should 1) check why we are getting them
> > > - * and 2) add ratelimit.
> > > + * We should check why we are getting them.
> > > *
> > > * UPDATE: One of the reasons (the only one?) for getting these
> > > * is incorrect standard (mismatch between expected and configured).
> > > @@ -151,7 +150,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
> > >
> > > /* Let the bug hunt begin! sanity checks! */
> > > if (lencopy < 0) {
> > > - stk1160_dbg("copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
> > > + printk_ratelimited(KERN_WARNING "copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
> >
> > You changed a debug message level to a KERN_WARNING level? That feels
> > like a step backwards.
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
>
> Hi Greg,
>
> Thanks for your response. The log level should indeed be DEBUG
> as it was earlier.
>
> I only wanted to add a rate limit there because it was printing too
> many log messages as mentioned in the todo. Shall I update the
> log level to DEBUG and resend the patch? Thank you very much
> again.
If it's spamming the logs, why print anything at all as obviously
everyone is ignoring it? But I do not really know, the final decision
should be up to the developer and maintainer of this subsystem.
thanks,
greg k-h
On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 1:58 PM Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 01:51:35PM +0530, Ghanshyam Agrawal wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 1:18 PM Greg KH <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 01:07:38PM +0530, Ghanshyam Agrawal wrote:
> > > > The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> > > > the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> > > > printk, it is now replaced with printk_ratelimited directly.
> > > >
> > > > Suggested-by: Phillip Potter <[email protected]>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Ghanshyam Agrawal <[email protected]>
> > > > ---
> > > > V3:
> > > > Fixed the issue with my patch needing previous versions being applied
> > > > first.
> > > >
> > > > Used printk_ratelimited instead of dev_warn_ratelimited because
> > > > of compiler error "incompatible pointer type".
> > > >
> > > > V2:
> > > > To add KERN_WARNING in printk_ratelimited, and later as per warning by
> > > > the checkpatch script, replaced printk_ratelimited with
> > > > dev_warn_ratelimited.
> > > >
> > > > V1:
> > > > The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> > > > the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> > > > printk, it is now replaced with dev_warn_ratelimited.
> > > >
> > > > drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c | 5 ++---
> > > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > > > index 4e966f6bf608..98417fa31d70 100644
> > > > --- a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
> > > > @@ -107,8 +107,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > > > * TODO: These stk1160_dbg are very spammy!
> > > > - * We should 1) check why we are getting them
> > > > - * and 2) add ratelimit.
> > > > + * We should check why we are getting them.
> > > > *
> > > > * UPDATE: One of the reasons (the only one?) for getting these
> > > > * is incorrect standard (mismatch between expected and configured).
> > > > @@ -151,7 +150,7 @@ void stk1160_copy_video(struct stk1160 *dev, u8 *src, int len)
> > > >
> > > > /* Let the bug hunt begin! sanity checks! */
> > > > if (lencopy < 0) {
> > > > - stk1160_dbg("copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
> > > > + printk_ratelimited(KERN_WARNING "copy skipped: negative lencopy\n");
> > >
> > > You changed a debug message level to a KERN_WARNING level? That feels
> > > like a step backwards.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > greg k-h
> >
> > Hi Greg,
> >
> > Thanks for your response. The log level should indeed be DEBUG
> > as it was earlier.
> >
> > I only wanted to add a rate limit there because it was printing too
> > many log messages as mentioned in the todo. Shall I update the
> > log level to DEBUG and resend the patch? Thank you very much
> > again.
>
> If it's spamming the logs, why print anything at all as obviously
> everyone is ignoring it? But I do not really know, the final decision
> should be up to the developer and maintainer of this subsystem.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
Hi Greg,
Noted with thanks. Let me update the patch.
Regards,
Ghanshyam Agrawal