On Tue, Mar 04, 2025 at 03:15:46PM +0100, Petr Mladek wrote: > On Tue 2025-03-04 15:05:52, John Ogness wrote: > > On 2025-03-04, Petr Mladek wrote: > > > I mean something like: > > > > > > --- a/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.c > > > +++ b/kernel/printk/printk_ringbuffer.c > > > @@ -2143,7 +2143,9 @@ static bool _prb_read_valid(struct printk_ringbuffer *rb, u64 *seq, > > > * But it would have the sequence number returned > > > * by "prb_next_reserve_seq() - 1". > > > */ > > > - if (this_cpu_in_panic() && ((*seq + 1) < prb_next_reserve_seq(rb))) > > > + if (this_cpu_in_panic() && > > > + (!printk_debug_non_panic_cpus || legacy_allow_panic_sync) && > > > + ((*seq + 1) < prb_next_reserve_seq(rb))) > > > (*seq)++; > > > else > > > return false; > > > > Ah, OK. Thanks for the clarification > > > > > OK, I propose the following changes: > > > > > > + rename the option to "printk_debug_non_panic_cpus" > > > > > > + do not skip the messages in _prb_read_valid() when this option > > > is used before the non-panic CPUs are stopped. > > > > And of course: > > > > + allow non-panic CPUs in panic to store messages when this option > > is set > > I would also keep the dump_stack_lvl() implementation as it is, even if > > it could lead to interweaving of backtraces. Anyone using > > printk_debug_non_panic_cpus should have CONFIG_PRINTK_CALLER enabled. Hi Petr Mladek, This is gentle remind. I did upload the patch containing the above contents. Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250305044046.1249972-1-d7271.choe@samsung.com/ Even if it's not necessarily this patch, I hope the content will be applied. When can the 'printk_debug_non_panic_cpus' function be reflected in mainline source code? Thanks.