1 |
On Thu, Mar 06, 2014 at 09:38:52AM +0100, Eric F. GARIOUD wrote: |
2 |
> On Tuesday 04 March 2014 19:16:35 Greg KH wrote: |
3 |
> > On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 09:39:11AM +0100, Eric F. GARIOUD wrote: |
4 |
> > > Having CONFIG_USB_ATM set and CONFIG_USB_DEBUG not set, syslogs are now |
5 |
> > > overfed with kyriads of |
6 |
> > > |
7 |
> > > << usbatm_rx_process: xyzt callbacks suppressed >> |
8 |
> > > |
9 |
> > > messages per minute. |
10 |
> > > |
11 |
> > > - My understanding is that a commit from Greg K-H caused the trouble : |
12 |
> > > |
13 |
> > > quoted from https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/2/429 : |
14 |
> > > |
15 |
> > > Greg Kroah-Hartman (46):... |
16 |
> > > |
17 |
> > > USB: usbatm: don't rely on CONFIG_USB_DEBUG USB: usbatm: remove |
18 |
> > > |
19 |
> > > CONFIG_USB_DEBUG dependancy |
20 |
> > > |
21 |
> > > - My understanding is that Krzysztof Mazur reported that behaviour as part |
22 |
> > > of |
23 |
> > > |
24 |
> > > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/26/65 |
25 |
> > > |
26 |
> > > Greg K-H is involved in the discussion and a patch seems to have been |
27 |
> > > produced. I did not manage to find it commited in 3.12 |
28 |
> > > |
29 |
> > > - Are there good reasons for this patch not to be commited ? |
30 |
> > |
31 |
> > What specific patch are you referring to? |
32 |
> |
33 |
> http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1310.3/01055.html |
34 |
> That is : [PATCH V2] printk: pr_debug_ratelimited: check state first toreduce |
35 |
> "callbacks suppressed" messages. |
36 |
> |
37 |
> And |
38 |
> |
39 |
> http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1310.3/01056.html |
40 |
> That is : [PATCH V2] usbatm: Fix dynamic_debug / ratelimited atm_dbg |
41 |
> andatm_rldbg macros |
42 |
> |
43 |
> > > - If not, as I understand 3.12 is longterm and maintained by Jiri Slaby, |
44 |
> > > could someone forward him a request to commit Joe Perches' work ? |
45 |
> > |
46 |
> > Why can't you? |
47 |
> |
48 |
> Heu... I am nothing but an humble end-user you know. When, in some thread I |
49 |
> read Greg K-H writing that he will commit the patch and AFAIK does not, then I |
50 |
> presume there is something wrong in my own understanding. |
51 |
> If, in addition to this, neither the reporter of the bug nor the author of the |
52 |
> patch push for committing then, at the very least, I do not feel personally |
53 |
> entitled to bother the longterm maintainer with this. |
54 |
|
55 |
This is all fixed in 3.13, so don't even worry about 3.12 anymore, you |
56 |
should have been upgraded already. |
57 |
|
58 |
greg k-h |