| To: | ak@xxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] NETDEBUG network triggerable messages in IPv6 |
| From: | YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 10 Apr 2004 02:47:05 +0900 (JST) |
| Cc: | davem@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20040409193123.63e4cdc7.ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | USAGI Project |
| References: | <20040409182125.348fd6cd.ak@xxxxxxx> <20040410.021840.113165465.yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040409193123.63e4cdc7.ak@xxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
In article <20040409193123.63e4cdc7.ak@xxxxxxx> (at Fri, 9 Apr 2004 19:31:23
+0200), Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> says:
> > I don't like the style; it is too ugly.
> > E.g. please do not put "if () ..." into the macro argument.
>
> Ok, here is a new version that defines a new macro LIMIT_NETDEBUG that does
> the
> rate limit implicitely.
> - if (net_ratelimit())
> - printk(KERN_WARNING "overrun
> destopt\n");
> + LIMIT_NETDEBUG(
> + printk(KERN_WARNING "overrun
> destopt\n"));
Grr...
I'd prefer:
if (net_ratelimit())
NETDEBUG_PRINTK("overrun destopt\n"..)
or
NETDEBUG_PRINTK_LIMIT("overrun destopt\n"..)
(or something like this) much more.
--yoshfuji
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] NETDEBUG network triggerable messages in IPv6, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] NETDEBUG network triggerable messages in IPv6, Nivedita Singhvi |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] NETDEBUG network triggerable messages in IPv6, Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] NETDEBUG network triggerable messages in IPv6, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |