From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-99.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-99.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BE7491BDCF for ; Mon, 12 Jan 2026 03:32:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.99 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768188740; cv=none; b=BzmRmKtbYl2+MRfEMlXci5iV6ZD5xdLskpaZGnVnNLBMiJqIlJr5jpeiOzBe807FghOyNrHrnfo465e8mfga0Ro+4W+fY7gAvCtxczglq4LxS16tVYsJ6KIooMTKzM+2lAy2L8jzmaATEAhbWfcqhDbB0jkOl2Xrn3L3LH2XzF4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1768188740; c=relaxed/simple; bh=uH0K+N9jSGkJ2ewoDNjBbEs1Fh7H5eSdYsFUAExJcoA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=GVIBrjmEGG2QA0NKW+M9rPSkRxyo3TDmFestHoxTqFDliv/LTbyShL85kj9rsNsRgVPkoi90DzaYaQju9uTXUPVPHqvyfbmxPM772LM3YCRHYtZQW9iCuCSLyTHrAkN7ZmaPuy3qxgKdXDxj6hPM3kYCS1S5bZJIMKsst2PcGHA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=f3x4a1Fd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.99 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="f3x4a1Fd" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1768188736; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type; bh=IYzEWMdZG22c7WdUMyUHSAwKRjmAAwOXigyj17SPAbA=; b=f3x4a1FdymJ4DX56B2lU6KChiV82xpe8jZpfPs+gkHdlfVF3qp7CXCj6bBXxKdkU2gJw61tOEYUbeumEKWFhLadnqtVB9Mhlxf+XTd/DZmZ/A+Lz1N0KrMcYzblxPy0zdn8hj/A2xJbgoxjuiTUqi08koiXO4GrdJPdNAg8yhjY= Received: from localhost(mailfrom:feng.tang@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0WwnmcCx_1768188735 cluster:ay36) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Mon, 12 Jan 2026 11:32:15 +0800 Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2026 11:32:14 +0800 From: Feng Tang To: Gal Pressman Cc: Petr Mladek , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mark Bloch , Nimrod Oren Subject: Re: [PATCH] panic: only warn about deprecated panic_print on write access Message-ID: References: <20260106163321.83586-1-gal@nvidia.com> <0107a066-72bb-4632-9129-70dab0707316@nvidia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0107a066-72bb-4632-9129-70dab0707316@nvidia.com> On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 10:28:55AM +0200, Gal Pressman wrote: > On 08/01/2026 17:52, Petr Mladek wrote: > > On Wed 2026-01-07 15:20:44, Feng Tang wrote: > >> On Wed, Jan 07, 2026 at 08:41:22AM +0200, Gal Pressman wrote: > >>> On 07/01/2026 5:00, Feng Tang wrote: > >>>>> @@ -1014,7 +1015,6 @@ static int panic_print_set(const char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp) > >>>>> > >>>>> static int panic_print_get(char *val, const struct kernel_param *kp) > >>>>> { > >>>>> - panic_print_deprecated(); > >>>> > >>>> Actually this was intentional, in one of the patch version, this > >>>> panic_print_get() was not there but reusing the param_get_ulong(). > >>>> > >>>> It was added later as sometimes developer do want to runtime check > >>>> the current 'panic_print' setting through /sys/module/kernel/parameters/ > >>>> interface, and I thought it may be better to give the warning. > >>> > >>> I figured it would make sense to keep the behaviors consistent. > > > > I see. > > > >> When people run 'sysctl -a', in 99.9% cases, the users don't care > >> 'panic_print' or even don't know what 'panic_print' is, that's why > >> I think removing it makes sense. > >> > >> But for a user running 'cat /sys/module/kernel/parameters/panic_rint', > >> giving a warning is meaningful. > > > > Makes perfect sense. > > > > We need to make people aware that "panic_print" will eventually go > > away. 'sysctl -a' is different because it prints all values and > > there is big chance that the caller is not interested in "panic_print" > > at all. > > > > It makes sense to remove the warning from sysctl read. But I would > > keep it in sysfs read. > > The sysfs entry exhibits the same issue, just different command: > > # systool -m kernel -v > > Or: > > # grep . /sys/module/kernel/parameters/* Yes, when user checks the kernel parameters, I think it's better to give them a notice (it's a pr_info_once(), which only prints once for the whole power cycle). Thanks, Feng