Messages in this thread | | | Subject | RE: printk_ratelimit and net_ratelimit conflict and tunable behavior | From | Joe Perches <> | Date | Mon, 25 Feb 2008 12:13:37 -0800 |
| |
On Mon, 2008-02-25 at 09:47 -0600, Hawkes Steve-FSH016 wrote: > How about this?
line wrapped, but seems better.
> Signed-off-by: Steve Hawkes <steve.hawkes@motorola.com> > > diff -uprN linux-2.6.24/include/linux/kernel.h > linux-2.6.24-printk_ratelimit/include/linux/kernel.h > --- linux-2.6.24/include/linux/kernel.h 2008-01-24 16:58:37.000000000 > + * This enforces a rate limit to mitigate denial-of-service attacks: > + * not more than ratelimit_burst messages every ratelimit_jiffies. > */ > -int __printk_ratelimit(int ratelimit_jiffies, int ratelimit_burst) > +int __printk_ratelimit(int ratelimit_jiffies, > + int ratelimit_burst, > + struct printk_ratelimit_state *state)
I think the value of in-place tunables is low. I'd remove that bit and use the struct printk_ratelimit_state.
David Miller points out that struct initializations to 0 or NULL are not necessary.
| |