linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
To: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, jirislaby@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ratelimit: check the condition in WARN_RATELIMIT first
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 11:45:39 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1345229139.10014.5.camel@joe2Laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <502E8A2C.3060606@suse.cz>

On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 20:15 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 08/17/2012 07:39 PM, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 15:42 +0200, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> >> Before calling __ratelimit in __WARN_RATELIMIT, check the condition
> >> first. When this check was not there, we got constant income of:
> >> tty_init_dev: 60 callbacks suppressed
> >> tty_init_dev: 59 callbacks suppressed
> > []
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/ratelimit.h b/include/linux/ratelimit.h
> > []
> >> @@ -49,8 +49,9 @@ extern int ___ratelimit(struct ratelimit_state *rs, const char *func);
> >>  #define __WARN_RATELIMIT(condition, state, format...)		\
> >>  ({								\
> >>  	int rtn = 0;						\
> >> -	if (unlikely(__ratelimit(state)))			\
> >> -		rtn = WARN(condition, format);			\
> >> +	int __rtcond = !!condition;				\
> >> +	if (unlikely(__rtcond && __ratelimit(state)))		\
> >> +		rtn = WARN(__rtcond, format);			\
> >>  	rtn;							\
> >>  })
> >>  
> > 
> > Hi Jiri.
> > 
> > This seems fine to me but are there any conditions that
> > are computationally expensive?
> 
> It's not about expensiveness of the computation. The complexity remained
> the same except I moved the computation one layer up.

If ratelimit(state) is not true, condition wasn't tested
or performed at all.  With this change, it's always done.

> > Maybe something like this?
[]
> Yup, something like that looks OK to me.

OK, David, do you want an official patch?



  reply	other threads:[~2012-08-17 18:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-08-17 13:42 [PATCH] ratelimit: check the condition in WARN_RATELIMIT first Jiri Slaby
2012-08-17 17:39 ` Joe Perches
2012-08-17 18:15   ` Jiri Slaby
2012-08-17 18:45     ` Joe Perches [this message]
2012-08-17 20:54       ` Jiri Slaby

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1345229139.10014.5.camel@joe2Laptop \
    --to=joe@perches.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=jirislaby@gmail.com \
    --cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).