netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 0/2] net: Use net_<level>

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 15 May 2012 20:27:10 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-decnet-user@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netfilter@...r.kernel.org,
	coreteam@...filter.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	dev@...nvswitch.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/2] net: Use net_<level>_ratelimit

On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 10:59 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:

> OK, but fyi, there's a possible issue with !CONFIG_DEBUG
> builds because these patches converted some uses of
> 	if (net_ratelimit())
> 		printk(KERN_DEBUG ...
> to
> 	net_dbg_ratelimited()
> 
> These messages are no longer emitted when DEBUG isn't defined
> and not using dynamic_debug.  I'm not sure that's a real
> problem, but it's a difference.
> 
> I could produce a net_printk_ratelimited that would keep
> the original behavior if necessary.
> 
> 	net_printk_ratelimited(KERN_DEBUG etc...)

Btw, what would the difference be to just plain printk_ratelimited()?

johannes

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html