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: <53282DD6.7020600@huawei.com>
Date:	Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:28:22 +0800
From:	Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
To:	Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
CC:	<fubar@...ibm.com>, <vfalico@...hat.com>, <andy@...yhouse.net>,
	<kaber@...sh.net>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/3] bonding: convert pr_xxx() to pr_xxx_ratelimited()
 for arp interval

On 2014/3/18 19:14, Joe Perches wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 04:01 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>> On Tue, 2014-03-18 at 18:43 +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote:
>>> The debug log in the arp interval should be rate limited, otherwise would
>>> occur spam the log, so convert them.
> []
>> Another way to do this is to use the
>> more global net_ratelimit() before
>> each existing pr_<level>.
>>
>> Not suggesting one or the other is
>> right or wrong here, it's just an option.
> 
> Another option is to use the net_<level>_ratelimited
> functions, but I'm not sure these are used much
> outside of net/.
> 
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>>
>>> @@ -2131,32 +2131,33 @@ static void bond_arp_send(struct net_device *slave_dev, int arp_op,
>>>  {
>>>  	struct sk_buff *skb;
>>>  
>>> -	pr_debug("arp %d on slave %s: dst %pI4 src %pI4\n",
>>> -		 arp_op, slave_dev->name, &dest_ip, &src_ip);
>>> +	pr_debug_ratelimited("arp %d on slave %s: dst %pI4 src %pI4\n",
>>> +			     arp_op, slave_dev->name, &dest_ip, &src_ip);
>>
>> 	if (net_ratelimit())
>> 		pr_debug(etc...)
> 
> or
> 
> 	net_dbg_ratelimited(etc...)
> 
> 
Thanks for these opinion. It looks like the net_ratelimit() is more reasonable.

It really need to spend time to distinguish which one is better here.
sometimes more choices more headaches. :)

Regards
Ding
> 
> 


--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ