From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752867AbcGSHCT (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jul 2016 03:02:19 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:37293 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752388AbcGSHCQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jul 2016 03:02:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 15:02:05 +0800 From: Dave Young To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Andrew Morton , LKML , Franck Bui , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Ingo Molnar , Linus Torvalds , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , Uwe =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kleine-K=F6nig?= Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 2/2] printk: Add kernel parameter to control writes to /dev/kmsg Message-ID: <20160719070205.GA6090@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> References: <20160718021809.GA6310@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> <20160718044407.GA20395@nazgul.tnic> <20160718052032.GA7911@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> <20160718072107.GA22689@nazgul.tnic> <20160718073845.GA9088@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> <20160718080846.GC22689@nazgul.tnic> <20160718081712.GA9239@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> <20160718090632.GD22689@nazgul.tnic> <20160719003507.GB3326@dhcp-128-65.nay.redhat.com> <20160719064959.GA25563@nazgul.tnic> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160719064959.GA25563@nazgul.tnic> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.28]); Tue, 19 Jul 2016 07:02:15 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 07/19/16 at 08:49am, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Jul 19, 2016 at 08:35:07AM +0800, Dave Young wrote: > > Ok, for example below (A and B can be any program, systemd or other logging > > utility, dracut scripts...) > > Are you even reading what I'm writing to you? > > I asked for real-life use case and I told you the ratelimiting is done > by openers of /dev/kmsg. > > > Program A: > > for (i = 0; i < 100; i++) > > write an error message A1 > > Because this is a real use case, right? Write A1 100 times in a loop?! > You gotta be f*cking kidding me! It is just emulating a use case, in a real life use case of course it shouldn't be a for loop. Suppose checking a device existance every some period, it is possible for same error messages being printed again and again, may for same device, may for different device, but it is from same source code line. I suppose you can understand, but you did not. Please stop being angry, I was trying to understand you. I hope you can also think from different point of view. > > Now I'm going to ignore you know until you start reading what I'm > writing to you. Same to me, I will stop reply because I have tried my best but I'm beginning have same feeling as you that is you just do not want to read what I wrote, sigh. Thanks Dave