From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750812AbWFLRSu (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:18:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751158AbWFLRSt (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:18:49 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:4242 "EHLO hera.kernel.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750812AbWFLRSt (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:18:49 -0400 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86 built-in command line Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 10:18:26 -0700 (PDT) Organization: Mostly alphabetical, except Q, with we do not fancy Message-ID: References: <20060611215530.GH24227@waste.org> <20060612143748.GN24227@waste.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Trace: terminus.zytor.com 1150132706 17509 127.0.0.1 (12 Jun 2006 17:18:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news@terminus.zytor.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 17:18:26 +0000 (UTC) X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test76 (Apr 2, 2001) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Followup to: <20060612143748.GN24227@waste.org> By author: Matt Mackall In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:11:24AM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Matt Mackall writes: > > > > > This patch allows building in a kernel command line on x86 as is > > > possible on several other arches. > > > > I'm surprised you didn't do the obvious "tiny" changes associated with > > that. Look at the static array sizes of the command line buffers. > > They're not entirely obvious. The saved command line buffer size is > currently fixed so if we set a default that's larger, we'd like to > have a compile failure if it's too large. > > Next step here is to make the buffer size configurable, which will > allow people to use command lines longer (or shorter!) than the boot > protocol allows (256 bytes on x86). > The boot protocol 256-byte limitation applies only to protocol version 2.01 or earlier. After that, there is still a 256-byte *KERNEL* limitation, but it is not a *PROTOCOL* limitation. In other words, the kernel can, and should be, upgraded; in fact, a gentleman by the name of Alon Bar-Lev has submitted that patch several times already; it wasn't accepted because of an unsubstantiated report that it broke LILO, the veracity of which I think is in serious doubt. -hpa