To clarify which messages come from arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c add
a prefix to all messages instead of just the previous reset reason.

Reviewed-by: Yazen Ghannam <yazen.ghannam@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello (AMD) <superm1@kernel.org>
---
v3:
 * add tag, put in it's own series
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
index bc94ff1e250ad..c19c4ee74dd1f 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c
@@ -1,4 +1,6 @@
 // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
+#define pr_fmt(fmt) "x86/amd: " fmt
+
 #include <linux/export.h>
 #include <linux/bitops.h>
 #include <linux/elf.h>
@@ -1396,7 +1398,7 @@ static __init int print_s5_reset_status_mmio(void)
 			continue;
 
 		if (s5_reset_reason_txt[i]) {
-			pr_info("x86/amd: Previous system reset reason [0x%08x]: %s\n",
+			pr_info("Previous system reset reason [0x%08x]: %s\n",
 				value, s5_reset_reason_txt[i]);
 		}
 	}
-- 
2.43.0

On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 01:33:47PM -0600, Mario Limonciello (AMD) wrote:
> To clarify which messages come from arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c add
> a prefix to all messages instead of just the previous reset reason.

The usual question: why do we need this?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

On 1/9/2026 1:45 PM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 01:33:47PM -0600, Mario Limonciello (AMD) wrote:
>> To clarify which messages come from arch/x86/kernel/cpu/amd.c add
>> a prefix to all messages instead of just the previous reset reason.
> 
> The usual question: why do we need this?
> 

Well originally the reason was that another message was being added in a 
series.  But the review of the series was deciding not to do it that 
way.  But this way any other future messages pick up the prefix already.

It's a trivial patch, but if you want to wait until another message 
comes around again we can hold off.

On Sat, Jan 10, 2026 at 07:39:35AM -0600, Mario Limonciello (AMD) (kernel.org) wrote:
> Well originally the reason was that another message was being added in a
> series.  But the review of the series was deciding not to do it that way.
> But this way any other future messages pick up the prefix already.
> 
> It's a trivial patch, but if you want to wait until another message comes
> around again we can hold off.

I'm actually wondering whether there's any specific reason to denote that the
messages come from this particular compilation unit...?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette

On 1/10/2026 7:53 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 10, 2026 at 07:39:35AM -0600, Mario Limonciello (AMD) (kernel.org) wrote:
>> Well originally the reason was that another message was being added in a
>> series.  But the review of the series was deciding not to do it that way.
>> But this way any other future messages pick up the prefix already.
>>
>> It's a trivial patch, but if you want to wait until another message comes
>> around again we can hold off.
> 
> I'm actually wondering whether there's any specific reason to denote that the
> messages come from this particular compilation unit...?
> 

My own personal use when looking at very noisy logs is to use "grep -v" 
and filter out prefixes.  Don't know if other people do that.