From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Denis Mukhin <dmkhn@proton.me>
Cc: andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, anthony.perard@vates.tech,
julien@xen.org, michal.orzel@amd.com, roger.pau@citrix.com,
sstabellini@kernel.org, dmukhin@ford.com,
xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] xen/console: make console buffer size configurable
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:23:47 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <224c2c94-0835-4ba9-88d7-c57bb1cd4ee8@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OyVZrdA69HTSGgzR--Ww8VQODmbKn_9CUDbnqVClk7Mkep-tQdOluHw2ofeoLekSohbc28ZSabP4l6O3dIQwrO_7jk6L7RxQwYs-6QxpLuE=@proton.me>
On 25.02.2025 03:45, Denis Mukhin wrote:
> On Monday, February 24th, 2025 at 2:44 AM, Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 21.02.2025 21:52, Denis Mukhin wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, February 18th, 2025 at 8:05 AM, Jan Beulich jbeulich@suse.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12.02.2025 23:31, dmkhn@proton.me wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> --- a/xen/drivers/char/Kconfig
>>>>> +++ b/xen/drivers/char/Kconfig
>>>>> @@ -96,6 +96,18 @@ config SERIAL_TX_BUFSIZE
>>>>>
>>>>> Default value is 32768 (32KiB).
>>>>>
>>>>> +config CONRING_SIZE
>>>>> + int "Console buffer size"
>>>>> + default 32768
>>>>> + range 16384 134217728
>>>>> + help
>>>>> + Select the boot console buffer size (in bytes).
>>>>
>>>> Why in bytes when ...
>>>>
>>>>> + Note, the value provided will be rounded down to the nearest power of 2.
>>>>
>>>> ... this rounding is done anyway? Why have people type in complicated numbers?
>>>> A granularity of 1k would already be an improvement; yet better would be if
>>>> this was a power-of-two value altogether.
>>>
>>> My understanding that the semantics of new CONFIG_CONRING_SIZE build-time setting
>>> should be consistent with existing boot-time conring_size= behavior (string value
>>> converted to number of bytes).
>>>
>>> I can update both to round up to 1k boundary.
>>>
>>> I also agree that having power of 2s for both (e.g. similar to Linux'es CONFIG_LOG_BUF_SHIFT)
>>> will be the simplest (implementation) and non-ambigous.
>>> I had it done earlier:
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20241205-vuart-ns8250-v1-26-e9aa923127eb@ford.com/
>>
>>
>> I'd prefer the power-of-2 approach, yet I could live with the Kb-based one as
>> was suggested by Roger.
>
> Just to double check: I think it makes sense to switch both build-time and run-time
> settings to use the same size calculation algorithm (e.g. Kb-based) to avoid
> confusion during building hypervisor configuration.
>
> Will that be OK to do such change?
No, you can't change existing command line options like this, at least not
without a very good reason. You'd break existing uses. Plus there is
size_param("conring_size", opt_conring_size);
already anyway, so the command line option can be used with Kb and other
granularities without any adjustments to the code.
>>> Also, since there's a build-time configuration parameter along with the boot-time
>>> configuration, perhaps it makes sense to retire boot-time setting in favor of
>>> build-time setting?
>>
>>
>> Why would that be? Build-time settings can only ever be defaults. We don't
>> know what people need in their configurations.
>
> I was thinking about few reasons.
> In embedded setup run-time settings are unlikely to change, it is mostly
> built-time configuration.
> On a server setup, bumping the size of console buffer morelikely means some
> debugging, which to me means new xen binary can be re-generated and re-deployed.
That depends on who's doing the debugging and who's giving the instructions.
A developer telling a customer to increase the buffer size is certainly
easier when it simply means adding/changing a command line option, for
example.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-25 7:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-12 22:31 [PATCH] xen/console: make console buffer size configurable dmkhn
2025-02-13 23:04 ` Stefano Stabellini
2025-02-18 16:05 ` Jan Beulich
2025-02-21 20:52 ` Denis Mukhin
2025-02-21 22:13 ` Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
2025-03-05 1:14 ` Denis Mukhin
2025-02-24 10:44 ` Jan Beulich
2025-02-25 2:45 ` Denis Mukhin
2025-02-25 7:23 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2025-03-05 1:16 ` Denis Mukhin
2025-03-05 1:14 ` Denis Mukhin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=224c2c94-0835-4ba9-88d7-c57bb1cd4ee8@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=anthony.perard@vates.tech \
--cc=dmkhn@proton.me \
--cc=dmukhin@ford.com \
--cc=julien@xen.org \
--cc=michal.orzel@amd.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=sstabellini@kernel.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.