linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi: core: Rate limit "rejecting I/O" messages

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]

Message-ID: <1586367363.7606.34.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 08 Apr 2020 10:36:03 -0700
From:   James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        "Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: core: Rate limit "rejecting I/O" messages

On Wed, 2020-04-08 at 19:10 +0200, Daniel Wagner wrote: 
> +#define sdev_printk_ratelimited(l, sdev, fmt, a...)			
> \
> +({									
> \
> +	static DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE(_rs,				
> \
> +				      DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_INTERVAL,	
> \
> +				      DEFAULT_RATELIMIT_BURST);	
> 	\
> +									
> \
> +	if (__ratelimit(&_rs))					
> 	\
> +		sdev_prefix_printk(l, sdev, NULL, fmt, ##a);	

If we do go with a ratelimit architecture for sdev_printk, I would
think the limit has to be per sdev, because we wouldn't want a burst of
messages on one sdev to suppress messages on another.

For this particular issue, I suppose one target can have many sdevs, so
you'd prefer to rate limit by target?

James