Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751344AbVJKBsl (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:48:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751346AbVJKBsl (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:48:41 -0400 Received: from nproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.182.198]:53601 "EHLO nproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751344AbVJKBsk convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2005 21:48:40 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=PYMkzAFSa+/WnsmO3Re+zrgx1Vd+ier2dMcHULZF32dXwKLxBpfCn3jaflOdhXYO9OLNZTk7CoVOrBK3c6YTSI3Oo4gpWo6l3adstGs/eA+RdY8GexgBGCQjXMnuwvVow1k2kPjEx6nkDapJsbwnJXyMz1gINQYkTCh9/hr+wt4= Message-ID: <2cd57c900510101848l5ecaa7e3p134f2e51950ab277@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 09:48:39 +0800 From: Coywolf Qi Hunt To: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit Cc: Alon Bar-Lev , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <431DFEC3.1070309@zytor.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Disposition: inline References: <4315B668.6030603@gmail.com> <43162148.9040604@zytor.com> <20050831215757.GA10804@taniwha.stupidest.org> <431628D5.1040709@zytor.com> <431DF9E9.5050102@gmail.com> <431DFEC3.1070309@zytor.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1881 Lines: 47 On 9/7/05, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > > > > Hello Peter, I've written a reply before but got no response... > > > > The idea of putting arguments in initramfs is not practical, since the > > whole idea is to have the same image of system and affecting its > > behavior using the boot loader... > > > > No, you're wrong. The boot loader can synthesize an initramfs. > > > I would like to push forward the idea to extend the command-line size... > > > > All we need for start is an updated version of the "THE LINUX/I386 BOOT > > PROTOCOL" document that states that in the 2.02+ protocol the boot > > loader should set cmd_line_ptr to a pointer to a null terminated string > > without any size restriction, specifying that the kernel will read as > > much as it can. > > Already pushed to Andrew. I will follow it up with a patch to extend > the command line, at least to 512. > > > After I get this update, I will try to work with GRUB and LILO so that > > they will fix their implementation. Currently they claim that they > > understand that they should truncate the string to 256. > > > > After that I will provide my simple patch for setting the maximum size > > the kernel allocates in the configuration. > > > > BTW: Do you know why the COMMAND_LINE_SIZE constant is located in two > > separate include files? > > No, I don't. It could be because one is included from assembly code in > the i386 architecture. The kernel uses the setup.h COMMAND_LINE_SIZE for both assembly and C code. COMMAND_LINE_SIZE in param.h is only for bootloader IMHO. -- Coywolf Qi Hunt http://sosdg.org/~coywolf/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/