Date:   Tue, 14 Feb 2023 09:38:47 +0100
From:   Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>
To:     Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
Cc:     Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
        Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru>,
        Matt Turner <mattst88@gmail.com>,
        Vineet Gupta <vgupta@kernel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@kernel.org>,
        WANG Xuerui <kernel@xen0n.name>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>,
        Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
        "James E . J . Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com>,
        Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>,
        Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
        Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
        Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
        Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>,
        Sven Schnelle <svens@linux.ibm.com>,
        Yoshinori Sato <ysato@users.sourceforge.jp>,
        Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Chris Zankel <chris@zankel.net>,
        Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org,
        loongarch@lists.linux.dev, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org,
        linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
        linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org,
        sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-xtensa@linux-xtensa.org,
        linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 00/24] Remove COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from uapi
Message-ID: <Y+tIl07KOOrGZ2Et@osiris>
References: <20230214074925.228106-1-alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230214074925.228106-1-alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 08:49:01AM +0100, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
> This all came up in the context of increasing COMMAND_LINE_SIZE in the
> RISC-V port.  In theory that's a UABI break, as COMMAND_LINE_SIZE is the
> maximum length of /proc/cmdline and userspace could staticly rely on
> that to be correct.
> 
> Usually I wouldn't mess around with changing this sort of thing, but
> PowerPC increased it with a5980d064fe2 ("powerpc: Bump COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
> to 2048").  There are also a handful of examples of COMMAND_LINE_SIZE
> increasing, but they're from before the UAPI split so I'm not quite sure
> what that means: e5a6a1c90948 ("powerpc: derive COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from
> asm-generic"), 684d2fd48e71 ("[S390] kernel: Append scpdata to kernel
> boot command line"), 22242681cff5 ("MIPS: Extend COMMAND_LINE_SIZE"),
> and 2b74b85693c7 ("sh: Derive COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from
> asm-generic/setup.h.").
> 
> It seems to me like COMMAND_LINE_SIZE really just shouldn't have been
> part of the uapi to begin with, and userspace should be able to handle
> /proc/cmdline of whatever length it turns out to be.  I don't see any
> references to COMMAND_LINE_SIZE anywhere but Linux via a quick Google
> search, but that's not really enough to consider it unused on my end.
> 
> The feedback on the v1 seemed to indicate that COMMAND_LINE_SIZE really
> shouldn't be part of uapi, so this now touches all the ports.  I've
> tried to split this all out and leave it bisectable, but I haven't
> tested it all that aggressively.

Just to confirm this assumption a bit more: that's actually the same
conclusion that we ended up with when commit 3da0243f906a ("s390: make
command line configurable") went upstream.