linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2] media: stk1160: Fixed high volume of stk1160

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 25 Nov 2023 12:42:26 +0530
From:   Ghanshyam Agrawal <ghanshyam1898@...il.com>
To:     Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>
Cc:     ezequiel@...guardiasur.com.ar, mchehab@...nel.org,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        skhan@...uxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] media: stk1160: Fixed high volume of stk1160_dbg messages

On Sat, Nov 25, 2023 at 4:00 AM Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 09:43:04PM +0530, Ghanshyam Agrawal wrote:
> > The function stk1160_dbg gets called too many times, which causes
> > the output to get flooded with messages. Since stk1160_dbg uses
> > printk, it is now replaced with dev_warn_ratelimited.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>
> > Signed-off-by: Ghanshyam Agrawal <ghanshyam1898@...il.com>
> > ---
> > v2:
> > Thanks for your suggestions Phillip. I have updated the TODO comment and
> > used dev_warn_ratelimited for inclusion of kernel warning.
> >
> >  drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c | 12 +++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c b/drivers/media/usb/stk1160/stk1160-video.c
>
> Hi Ghanshyam,
>
> Thank you for the patch, but it is sadly incorrect.
>
> You have created this V2 against a tree including the V1 version of your
> patch. A V2 patch should apply cleanly against the source tree, with no
> previous version first needing to be applied.
>
> On another note, why are you using dev_warn_ratelimited here, and if
> there's a good reason, why not use it for the other callsites in this
> function? (Genuine question here, I've not studied the difference).
>
> Please create a V3, many thanks.
>
> Nacked-by: Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>
>
> Regards,
> Phil

Hi Phillip,

Thank you for taking time to review my patch.

I will fix the issue with my patch needing previous versions being applied
first.

I had used dev_warn_ratelimited because the checkpatch script mentioned
a sequence of priorities to use various logging functions and
dev_warn_ratelimited had higher priority. But now I have found other issues
with using this function here, so I will switch back to printk_ratelimited.

Let me fix the issues and submit a V3 patch. Thanks again for your time
and kind suggestions.

Regards,
Ghanshyam Agrawal