Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:206:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 6csp3529103pxj; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 00:14:54 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyh5abIsFueWNs6H4Gt2uvu+ICBF9bUkpZ/gZIQGo1i4oEX0FnjwVxAhm7IeKmszBN0vFmf X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:c010:: with SMTP id e16mr23301749ejz.214.1624259694650; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 00:14:54 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1624259694; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=j5cYfG3lVOVSUKlfLxHfdkyhDAg3PeYOVXQWYAGx1PgXuwg4X2CMo8N1ozIly4tiil 0OY4alutG1V0RZKart5I0tONHJ8O4aKbyTNbzQQPTILW1XQcAOkQmaSRpa+rIeG8cr9b D35nwOHAJxIzqdLk5L9uWYUj7M3ldKn7g0qOm/xIzDo5Le0zm1drS7pyLApJq/Z5eLYm Ncm+jDV3yycslLRNSZSNahYRrNJPaiXm0LnZ95c1MuUMhvjhepYi4GzfLQWqxSO+dzy6 QuMvhZCBRzjZ3Cy83QMwf6a/BAzE5ccpGH/BsywYtNXOBof6uzo7eGGXPPwwzaPt4xiK s5DA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:content-language :in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date:message-id:from:references :cc:to:subject; bh=cP/C4gCo5axupQ+5IYgTC+4bdzpZ0v0Q+vouviFHJQs=; b=KUn2SsOseXRznbyaCS5jM6K7thd/6K6veJH6CcNVpffqE6+k6IrWysTt/Q6XqvjoUD He6cdtc2ZWQ2Hxmg1QZSa5RBqrxsUERl4aokCJ5OPP2/1dduY6SHlw6WelfduLaV7fr7 wlQsi4AEG4tAkhD6qS46A5JXAKZJ0Cu57lQf/n47QydHIbU/DCRBkBhN4hMfsT3Nj/at MRp0O5M+w2yjKqQBSTqaqMrmkS/nzMutluWYWyb9ehKTjaPPbaAtVUE6m3pUauLxa4MI rgG4q4Th889MK7LQdlW2G7epPySdW1tLPvB4gS7aGJ4O7qnttCPbn3QwTlIqyFRBU3yo B3yA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id x5si14690604edd.181.2021.06.21.00.14.31; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 00:14:54 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229943AbhFUHNz (ORCPT + 99 others); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 03:13:55 -0400 Received: from relay1-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.193]:13573 "EHLO relay1-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229597AbhFUHNy (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Jun 2021 03:13:54 -0400 Received: (Authenticated sender: alex@ghiti.fr) by relay1-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 437B6240008; Mon, 21 Jun 2021 07:11:38 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH] riscv: Bump COMMAND_LINE_SIZE value to 1024 To: Palmer Dabbelt , macro@orcam.me.uk Cc: david.abdurachmanov@gmail.com, dvyukov@google.com, Paul Walmsley , linux-api@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: From: Alex Ghiti Message-ID: <182c1d4e-a117-79d6-4dd1-8e3c8a447b4a@ghiti.fr> Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2021 09:11:37 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.11.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: fr Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Palmer, Le 23/04/2021 ? 04:57, Palmer Dabbelt a ?crit?: > On Fri, 02 Apr 2021 11:33:30 PDT (-0700), macro@orcam.me.uk wrote: >> On Fri, 2 Apr 2021, David Abdurachmanov wrote: >> >>> > > >? This macro is exported as a part of the user API so it must >>> not depend on >>> > > > Kconfig.? Also changing it (rather than say adding >>> COMMAND_LINE_SIZE_V2 or >>> > > > switching to an entirely new data object that has its dimension >>> set in a >>> > > > different way) requires careful evaluation as external binaries >>> have and >>> > > > will have the value it expands to compiled in, so it's a part >>> of the ABI >>> > > > too. >>> > > >>> > > Thanks, I didn't realize this was part of the user BI.? In that >>> case we >>> > > really can't chage it, so we'll have to sort out some other way >>> do fix >>> > > whatever is going on. >>> > > >>> > > I've dropped this from fixes. >>> > >>> > Does increasing COMMAND_LINE_SIZE break user-space binaries? I would >>> > expect it to work the same way as adding new enum values, or adding >>> > fields at the end of versioned structs, etc. >>> > I would assume the old bootloaders/etc will only support up to the >>> > old, smaller max command line size, while the kernel will support >>> > larger command line size, which is fine. >>> > However, if something copies /proc/cmdline into a fixed-size buffer >>> > and expects that to work, that will break... that's quite unfortunate >>> > user-space code... is it what we afraid of? >>> > >>> > Alternatively, could expose the same COMMAND_LINE_SIZE, but internally >>> > support a larger command line? >>> >>> Looking at kernel commit history I see PowerPC switched from 512 to >>> 2048, and I don't see complaints about the ABI on the mailing list. >>> >>> If COMMAND_LINE_SIZE is used by user space applications and we >>> increase it there shouldn't be problems. I would expect things to >>> work, but just get truncated boot args? That is the application will >>> continue only to look at the initial 512 chars. >> >> ?The macro is in an include/uapi header, so it's exported to the userland >> and a part of the user API.? I don't know what the consequences are for >> the RISC-V port specifically, but it has raised my attention, and I think >> it has to be investigated. >> >> ?Perhaps it's OK to change it after all, but you'd have to go through >> known/potential users of this macro.? I guess there shouldn't be that >> many >> of them. >> >> ?In any case it cannot depend on Kconfig, because the userland won't have >> access to the configuration, and then presumably wants to handle any and >> all. > > It kind of feels to me like COMMAND_LINE_SIZE shouldn't have been part > of the UABI to begin with.? I sent a patch to remove it from the > asm-generic UABI, let's see if anyone knows of a reason it should be UABI: > > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arch/20210423025545.313965-1-palmer@dabbelt.com/T/#u Arnd seemed to agree with you about removing COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from the UABI, any progress on your side? Thanks, Alex > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-riscv mailing list > linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv