Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 18:37:30 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Krzysztof Mazur <krzysiek@podlesie.net>
Cc: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: usbatm: printk_ratelimit() always called in the atm_rldbg()
Message-ID: <20131026173730.GA18320@kroah.com>
References: <20131026132955.GA9251@shrek.podlesie.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131026132955.GA9251@shrek.podlesie.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1082
Lines: 34

On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 03:29:56PM +0200, Krzysztof Mazur wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> commit 2d6401cf4ca3861692a4779745e0049cac769d10
> ("USB: usbatm: move the atm_dbg() call to use dynamic debug")
> changed the atm_rldbg() to:
> 
> #define atm_rldbg(instance, format, arg...)		\
> 	if (printk_ratelimit())				\
> 		atm_dbg(instance , format , ## arg)
> 
> and now printk_ratelimit() is always called even when debugging is
> disabled and a lot of "callbacks suppressed" messages are printed
> by the printk_ratelimit():
> 
> [...]
> usbatm_rx_process: 4977 callbacks suppressed
> usbatm_extract_one_cell: 2920 callbacks suppressed
> [...]
> 
> 
> I'm not sure how to fix that, maybe we need dynamic_pr_debug_ratelimit()?

How about just deleting the use of that macro entirely?  Odds are it's
not really needed anymore, right?

thanks,

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