Re: [PATCH] kernel.h: Add printk_ratelimited and pr_<level>_rl

[Randy Dunlap]

Joe Perches wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-11-09 at 13:49 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Fri, 30 Oct 2009 16:21:47 -0700
>> Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> +#define pr_emerg_rl(fmt, ...) \
>>> +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_EMERG pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>> +#define pr_alert_rl(fmt, ...) \
>>> +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_ALERT pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>> +#define pr_crit_rl(fmt, ...) \
>>> +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_CRIT pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>> +#define pr_err_rl(fmt, ...) \
>>> +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_ERR pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>> +#define pr_warning_rl(fmt, ...) \
>>> +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_WARNING pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>> +#define pr_notice_rl(fmt, ...) \
>>> +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_NOTICE pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
>>> +#define pr_info_rl(fmt, ...) \
>>> +        printk_ratelimited(KERN_INFO pr_fmt(fmt), ##__VA_ARGS__)
>> Would prefer pr_emerg_ratelimited personally.  It's longer, but one
>> doesn't ask "wtf does _rl" mean and it avoids having two identifiers
>> which refer to the same thing.
> 
> I don't have a strong opinion either way.
> _rl is shorter and that has some value.

but we have a long history of not using cryptic abbreviations,
so I agree with Andrew.

> I think pr_crit_rl, pr_emerg_rl and pr_alert_rl likely
> aren't useful.  Is there a sensible use case for those?

Not likely.

> I added them for completeness, but...

--
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/