Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E97C1C433F5 for ; Tue, 4 Jan 2022 19:37:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229962AbiADThJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2022 14:37:09 -0500 Received: from fanzine2.igalia.com ([213.97.179.56]:58576 "EHLO fanzine2.igalia.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229697AbiADThH (ORCPT ); Tue, 4 Jan 2022 14:37:07 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=igalia.com; s=20170329; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version :Date:Message-ID:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=c79Cvyi3tuo9WddH41m2TtymOCs7U8J7heJs6dXudQ8=; b=svRBeHTRJns4oIluDmkept3Yev s/akUraqokxa/ewz2G5aFGKEiDr8OqfqBlal+izIZqK0AhsmdyedebCjeDq8OBCFyZROhaJM38ddG EJyGArTs9ncVcBhXLPcrdwbHrcrxZg5BU5N38fHtBOXQSD2W2LEsRoQnehteijDKUvcCSAESRFmWB I2iHNCGybG2RyINDFAsPUAChtXpdNoqZiKJzTbRK2z7MPp2OnRbJsKC+PC+lazkfHse/UFZ6HOxZw Ce9K2VxN/mUift8HTw9Qvdc9V0mC0XCqCZe0fGm12Q9kYylLU1gG4/rwy6lOdJFHyxV29MwBUsRz4 QvoJn+BA==; Received: from 200-153-146-242.dsl.telesp.net.br ([200.153.146.242] helo=[192.168.1.60]) by fanzine2.igalia.com with esmtpsa (Cipher TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_128_GCM:128) (Exim) id 1n4pcB-000Bpn-3m; Tue, 04 Jan 2022 20:36:59 +0100 Subject: Re: pstore/ramoops - why only collect a partial dmesg? To: "Luck, Tony" , "keescook@chromium.org" , "anton@enomsg.org" , "ccross@android.com" Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Linux-Fsdevel , "Guilherme G. Piccoli" References: <2d1e9afa38474de6a8b1efc14925d095@intel.com> <0ca4c27a-a707-4d36-9689-b09ef715ac67@igalia.com> <8675f69c1643451b91f797b114dfc311@intel.com> From: "Guilherme G. Piccoli" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2022 16:36:43 -0300 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.14.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <8675f69c1643451b91f797b114dfc311@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 04/01/2022 15:46, Luck, Tony wrote: > That does change things ... I wonder how many megabytes you need > for a big system (hundreds of cores, thousands of tasks)! Heheh indeed, this case would require a very big log buffer I guess! But our setup is not so big, only 4/8 CPUs, not so much RAM and not that many tasks expected, opposed to a big server with maybe multiple VMs, containers, etc... > > This use case does look like it could use multiple chunks in ramoops. Cool, thanks! If nobody complains or show any reason in that ramoops shouldn't be changed to deal with multi-chunk dmesg, I'll try to come up with something then. Cheers, Guilherme