Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/2] random: Omit double-printing ratelimit messages | From | Dmitry Safonov <> | Date | Wed, 16 May 2018 23:11:55 +0100 |
| |
On Wed, 2018-05-16 at 16:54 -0400, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 04:46:13PM +0100, Dmitry Safonov wrote: > > > Yeah, but what you print is not total sum, it's since the last > > > interval because without mentioned flag ___ratelimit() will flush > > > missed counter and print "suppressed" message. They might even > > > double if say other proccess has called get_random_bytes() got to > > > ___ratelimit() and got preempted. This thread finishes > > > initializing random driver and prints this not-proper-sum > > > statistics, and when the code flow is back in the first context, > > > it will print statistics again from ___ratelimit() function. > > > > So, does it make sense to you, Theodore? > > If not - I'll just resend second patch rebasing and dropping this > > one. > > Yes, it's correct that it's not the total sum. I guess your > complaint > is that some of the messages are using the "callbacks suppressed" > message, and the last one is using the random drvier's custom message > which I think is much more user-friendly. That being said, although > I > think "callbacks suppressed is a terrible message, I agree that using > a single message makes more sense. So setting the > RATELIMIT_MSG_ON_RELEASE and then calling ratelimit_state_exit() from > crng_reseed() does make sense. > > In the future I'd like to push for some way to customize --- or > perhaps just fix --- "callbacks suppressed" to something more sane > like, "messages ratelimited", but that's more of an aesthetics issue.
Thanks, Ted. As you've looked inside lib/ratelimit, care to review 2 patch from the series maybe?
-- Thanks, Dmitry
| |