On Fri, 18 Jan 2019, "Kristian H. Kristensen" <hoegsberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Otherwise we get hard to track down "Purging: 123123 bytes" messages in
> the log.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kristian H. Kristensen <hoegsberg@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_shrinker.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_shrinker.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_shrinker.c
> index b72d8e6cd51d7..8161923892f55 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_shrinker.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/msm/msm_gem_shrinker.c
> @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ msm_gem_shrinker_scan(struct shrinker *shrinker, struct shrink_control *sc)
> mutex_unlock(&dev->struct_mutex);
>
> if (freed > 0)
> - pr_info_ratelimited("Purging %lu bytes\n", freed << PAGE_SHIFT);
> + DRM_DEV_INFO_RATELIMITED(dev->dev, "Purging %lu bytes\n", freed << PAGE_SHIFT);
I'm not opposed to the patches per se, but it does seem a bit odd to be
printing info level messages in a way that might need ratelimiting. Is
this a hint you should perhaps make it debug?
BR,
Jani.
>
> return freed;
> }
> @@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ msm_gem_shrinker_vmap(struct notifier_block *nb, unsigned long event, void *ptr)
> *(unsigned long *)ptr += unmapped;
>
> if (unmapped > 0)
> - pr_info_ratelimited("Purging %u vmaps\n", unmapped);
> + DRM_DEV_INFO_RATELIMITED(dev->dev, "Purging %u vmaps\n", unmapped);
>
> return NOTIFY_DONE;
> }
--
Jani Nikula, Intel Open Source Graphics Center
_______________________________________________
dri-devel mailing list
dri-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/dri-devel
