From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756954Ab1FPQn4 (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2011 12:43:56 -0400 Received: from mail.perches.com ([173.55.12.10]:3035 "EHLO mail.perches.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751471Ab1FPQny (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2011 12:43:54 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/11] drivers/net: use printk_ratelimited() instead of printk_ratelimit() From: Joe Perches To: Manuel Zerpies Cc: "David S. Miller" , David Decotigny , "Hans J. Koch" , Jiri Kosina , Ben Pfaff , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, christian.dietrich@informatik.uni-erlangen.de In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2011 09:43:52 -0700 Message-ID: <1308242632.9563.12.camel@Joe-Laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 14:12 +0200, Manuel Zerpies wrote: > Since printk_ratelimit() shouldn't be used anymore (see comment in > include/linux/printk.h), replace it with printk_ratelimited() [] > diff --git a/drivers/net/sc92031.c b/drivers/net/sc92031.c [] > @@ -536,8 +537,7 @@ static bool _sc92031_check_media(struct net_device *dev) > > netif_carrier_on(dev); > > - if (printk_ratelimit()) > - printk(KERN_INFO "%s: link up, %sMbps, %s-duplex\n", > + printk_ratelimited(KERN_INFO "%s: link up, %sMbps, %s-duplex\n", > dev->name, > speed_100 ? "100" : "10", > duplex_full ? "full" : "half"); All these might be better using net_ratelimit and netdev_ if (net_ratelimit()) netdev_info(dev, "link up, %uMbps, %s-duplex\n", speed_100 ? 100 : 10, duplex_full ? "full" : "half"); > @@ -549,8 +549,7 @@ static bool _sc92031_check_media(struct net_device *dev) > > _sc92031_disable_tx_rx(dev); > > - if (printk_ratelimit()) > - printk(KERN_INFO "%s: link down\n", dev->name); > + printk_ratelimited(KERN_INFO "%s: link down\n", dev->name); etc... netdev__ratelimited (and netdev__once) could instead be added and used I suppose.