Re: [gentoo-kernel] 3.12 Kernels : Regression in the handling of usbatm debug traces

[Eric F. GARIOUD]

On Tuesday 04 March 2014 19:16:35 Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 09:39:11AM +0100, Eric F. GARIOUD wrote:
> > Having CONFIG_USB_ATM set and CONFIG_USB_DEBUG not set, syslogs are now
> > overfed with kyriads of
> >
> > << usbatm_rx_process: xyzt callbacks suppressed >>
> >
> > messages per minute.
> >
> > - My understanding is that a commit from Greg K-H caused the trouble :
> >
> > quoted from https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/9/2/429 :
> >
> > Greg Kroah-Hartman (46):...
> >
> >       USB: usbatm: don't rely on CONFIG_USB_DEBUG      USB: usbatm: remove
> >
> > CONFIG_USB_DEBUG dependancy
> >
> > - My understanding is that Krzysztof Mazur reported that behaviour as part
> > of
> >
> > https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/10/26/65
> >
> > Greg K-H is involved in the discussion and a patch seems to have been
> > produced. I did not manage to find it commited in 3.12
> >
> > - Are there good reasons for this patch not to be commited ?
>
> What specific patch are you referring to?

http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1310.3/01055.html
That is : [PATCH V2] printk: pr_debug_ratelimited: check state first toreduce 
"callbacks suppressed" messages.

And

http://lkml.iu.edu//hypermail/linux/kernel/1310.3/01056.html
That is : [PATCH V2] usbatm: Fix dynamic_debug / ratelimited atm_dbg 
andatm_rldbg macros
 
> > - If not, as I understand 3.12 is longterm and maintained by Jiri Slaby,
> > could someone forward him a request to commit Joe Perches' work ?
>
> Why can't you?

Heu... I am nothing but an humble end-user you know. When, in some thread I 
read Greg K-H writing that he will commit the patch and AFAIK does not, then I 
presume there is something wrong in my own understanding.
If, in addition to this, neither the reporter of the bug nor the author of the 
patch push for committing then, at the very least, I do not feel personally 
entitled to bother the longterm maintainer with this.  

Regards,

Eric