[parisc-linux] Palo: cmdline and commanline has different limits?

[parisc-linux] Palo: cmdline and commanline has different limits?

[Joel Soete]

Hi Paul,

I just notice a small problem:

In palo/palo/palo.c at line 720:
	...
	if (strlen(commandline) > 255)
	...

OTC in palo/lib/common.h in struct firstblock at line 46:

     char cmdline[128];          /* Up to 127 bytes of text plus a \0 */

     unsigned char pad1[0xf0 - 8 - 7 * sizeof (int) - 128];


I do not know yet if pad1 can be removed so that cmdline could reach 204 
[240-8-7*(sizeof int = 4?)] char lenght, also I prefer to let you choise.

Joel

Re: [parisc-linux] Palo: cmdline and commanline has different limits?

[Carlos O'Donell]

> Hi Paul,
> I just notice a small problem:
> In palo/palo/palo.c at line 720:
> 	...
> 	if (strlen(commandline) > 255)
> 	...
> OTC in palo/lib/common.h in struct firstblock at line 46:
>     char cmdline[128];          /* Up to 127 bytes of text plus a \0 */
>     unsigned char pad1[0xf0 - 8 - 7 * sizeof (int) - 128];
> 
> I do not know yet if pad1 can be removed so that cmdline could reach 204 
> [240-8-7*(sizeof int = 4?)] char lenght, also I prefer to let you choise.
> 
> Joel

I don't see why not? Would 200 characters be enough for your application?

I do think that "> 255" should be changed in palo.c

To push it out further would require teaching palo about 
both formats (and understanding why the comment mentions 
that all the data must fit in 256 byes).

c.

Re: [parisc-linux] Palo: cmdline and commanline has different limits?

[Carlos O'Donell]

> > I do not know yet if pad1 can be removed so that cmdline could reach 204 
> > [240-8-7*(sizeof int = 4?)] char lenght, also I prefer to let you choise.
> > 
> > Joel
> 
> I don't see why not? Would 200 characters be enough for your application?
> 
> I do think that "> 255" should be changed in palo.c
> 
> To push it out further would require teaching palo about 
> both formats (and understanding why the comment mentions 
> that all the data must fit in 256 byes).
> 
> c.

Joel,

I just talked to Bame and we both agree that those bytes would
best be left for future expansion.

I've made the change in palo.c such that it checks for "> 127"
I'll be cheking that in today, and a new deb of palo should be out
next week. If you would like to help in the testing process then 
checkout palo from cvs and you can build the package yourself.

The documentation for palo was updated to reflect a limit
in the -c argument.

Do you have a particular use for more than 127 bytes of command line
information? Passing a _lot_ of data via the command line is not 
accepted as good practice :}

c.

Re: [parisc-linux] Palo: cmdline and commanline has different limits?

[jsoe0708]

>-- Original Message --
>From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@baldric.uwo.ca>
>To: Joel Soete <joel.soete@freebel.net>, bame@fc.hp.com,
>	parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org
>Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] Palo: cmdline and commanline has different limits?
>Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2002 10:59:19 -0400
>
>
>> > I do not know yet if pad1 can be removed so that cmdline could reach
>204 
>> > [240-8-7*(sizeof int = 4?)] char lenght, also I prefer to let you choise.
>> > 
>> > Joel
>> 
>> I don't see why not? Would 200 characters be enough for your application?
>> 
>> I do think that "> 255" should be changed in palo.c
>> 
>> To push it out further would require teaching palo about 
>> both formats (and understanding why the comment mentions 
>> that all the data must fit in 256 byes).
>> 
>> c.
>
>Joel,
>
>I just talked to Bame and we both agree that those bytes would
>best be left for future expansion.
>
>I've made the change in palo.c such that it checks for "> 127"
>I'll be cheking that in today, and a new deb of palo should be out
>next week. If you would like to help in the testing process then 
>checkout palo from cvs and you can build the package yourself.
>
>The documentation for palo was updated to reflect a limit
>in the -c argument.
>
>Do you have a particular use for more than 127 bytes of command line
>information? Passing a _lot_ of data via the command line is not 
>accepted as good practice :}

Carlos,

It is Ok for me.

I do not actualy need more.
I am just studying palo code to see what have to be done to support raid1
md for the /boot device :) and just notice that potential problem so I report
it :)

Thanks a lot for all,
    J.