On 8/12/26 4:15 PM, Danilo Krummrich wrote: > On Thu Aug 13, 2026 at 12:41 AM CEST, John Hubbard wrote: >> I'd *much* rather use a kernel parameter: keep_gsp_logs, instead of >> requiring a rebuild of the kernel. As you mention above, nouveau >> arrived at the same conclusion, and yet even after mentioning it, >> you went off in this other direction, but without explaining why. > > Not sure if Vladislav read that, but it might be on us; we were both talking > about a Kconfig in [1] back then, but meant a module param actually. :)
Yes, it's less clear from those threads, that's true. :) > >> If someone is debugging, all they need to do is reboot with that >> parameter, in order to get the logs. That's a big improvement over >> requiring a kernel rebuild. > > I think for development it doesn't make a huge difference, but a module param > might be easier to deal with if something unexpected happens in some less > controlled environment. > > So, while I'm usually not a huge fan of module params, I do agree in this > case. > > [1] > https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ thanks, -- John Hubbard
