From: "Daniel Walker (danielwa)" <danielwa@cisco.com>
To: Brian Mak <makb@juniper.net>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] x86/boot: Add option to append to the cmdline
Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2025 20:33:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aN7hqiQg1cDIMIG9@goliath> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <D435A8B5-46E2-440C-940F-A3FE5364C1CD@juniper.net>
On Thu, Oct 02, 2025 at 05:30:10PM +0000, Brian Mak wrote:
> On Oct 1, 2025, at 5:13 PM, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > On 10/1/25 16:04, Brian Mak wrote:
> >> To solve this limitation, we add CONFIG_CMDLINE_EXTEND, which is already
> >> available on several other architectures, to make the built-in command
> >> line append to the bootloader-provided command line.
> >
> > I'd really rather not have another copy-and-paste of another
> > architecture's Kconfig bits into x86.
> >
> > At the _very_ least, we'd get a boolean ARCH_HAS_CMDLIND_EXTEND which
> > would then expose an arch-independent CMDLINE_EXTEND option. Literally
> > duplicating Kconfig options just isn't scalable.
>
> Hi Dave,
>
> Thanks for your comments!
>
> Sure, I'll introduce an arch-independent (ARCH_HAS_)CMDLINE_EXTEND option
> in v2.
>
> > I also cringe every time I see code like this get added to arch/x86 that
> > really doesn't have anything to do with x86 and really only gets dumped
> > in to arch/ because there's never been a proper refactoring of all the
> > copy-and-pasted code.
> >
> > In the end, refactoring Kconfig is dirt simple. Refactoring
> > builtin_cmdline[] into arch-independent code would be a lot harder.
>
> In the past, there have been efforts to add arch-independent cmdline
> processing [1] (CC: Daniel Walker). These efforts have been stalled for a
> long time now though.
We use my change at Cisco in production, but I don't submit it often enough.
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-02 20:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-01 23:04 [PATCH RESEND] x86/boot: Add option to append to the cmdline Brian Mak
2025-10-02 0:13 ` Dave Hansen
2025-10-02 17:30 ` Brian Mak
2025-10-02 20:33 ` Daniel Walker (danielwa) [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2025-09-15 20:26 Brian Mak
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=aN7hqiQg1cDIMIG9@goliath \
--to=danielwa@cisco.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=makb@juniper.net \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox