From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751807Ab1HDGpG (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2011 02:45:06 -0400 Received: from mail-vw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.212.46]:61458 "EHLO mail-vw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750891Ab1HDGpC convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Aug 2011 02:45:02 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20110803223407.GA20646@redhat.com> References: <20110803223407.GA20646@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 4 Aug 2011 14:45:01 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [rfc] suppress excessive AER output From: huang ying To: Dave Jones , Linux Kernel , tom.l.nguyen@intel.com, yanmin.zhang@intel.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 6:34 AM, Dave Jones wrote: > I have a machine that has developed some kind of problem with > its onboard ethernet.  It still boots, but spewed almost 1.5G of text > (2381585 instances of the warning below) before we realised what > was going on, and blacklisted the igb driver. > > Is it worth logging every single error when we're flooding like this ? > It seems unlikely that we'll find useful information in amongst that much data > that wasn't already in the first 100 instances. > > I picked 100 in the (untested) example patch below arbitarily, but the exact > value could be smaller, or slightly bigger.. > > could we do something like this maybe ? Why not use __ratelimit to implement this feature? Best Regards, Huang Ying