Re: [PATCH] printk: introduce should_ignore_loglevel()

[Petr Mladek]

On Sat 2016-06-25 14:22:37, Sergey Senozhatsky wrote:
> On (06/24/16 18:05), Petr Mladek wrote:
> [..]
> > > +static bool should_ignore_loglevel(int level)
> > > +{
> > > +	return (level >= console_loglevel && !ignore_loglevel);
> > 
> > The patch looks fine. It is nice optimization.
> > 
> > I was just quite confused by the name of this function. A function
> > called should_ignore_loglevel() should not return false when
> > ignore_loglevel variable is true.
> > 
> > I would call it ignore_message() or ignore_message_on_console() or so.
> 
> Hello Petr, you are right.
> 
> I was thinking about
> 
> s/should_ignore_loglevel/suppress_message/g
> or.... s/should_ignore_loglevel/suppress_message_by_level/g
> s/should_ignore_loglevel/suppress_message_printing/g
> 
> suppress_message_printing() is probably fine.

All variants look fine to me. After renaming, feel free to
add:

Reviewed-by: Petr Mladek <pmladek@xxxxxxxx>

Best Regards,
Petr


PS: The ignore_loglevel handling is a bit racy in some situations.
For example, uv_nmi_dump_state() or __handle_sysrq() set another
level, print some messages, and restore the original level. They
do not wait until all the printed messages appear on the console.
Also they do not synchronize against each other.

I am not sure if we have already discussed this. It is not critical
and it works well most of the time. I just want to make sure that
you know about it as you have more plans with the printk/console code.