Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3DE0C64ED8 for ; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 01:21:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229867AbjBYBVp (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2023 20:21:45 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50402 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229698AbjBYBTv (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2023 20:19:51 -0500 Received: from ams.source.kernel.org (ams.source.kernel.org [145.40.68.75]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19A9F30192; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 17:19:13 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ams.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2AFFB81D70; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 01:19:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D29DC433D2; Sat, 25 Feb 2023 01:19:10 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1677287950; bh=ggtCBOdroZma1BxMO4zu+ds8Jh2QD1F37oeOd2MCFcc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Reply-To:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=GGEg1S4inijFQ/Wn94pMABd+G45WjS5aOHod+VYeVhOsuDYs8PVPBF0w99flBYXkT lskaHhZmy0OOYMx5bOnA5Bk0KUcbxl4z/yiP2uWyDy2nv4JpABBaCNk2YJLIK8ouhT 60YeEocblefwTms2cXgA87zsyFADhkDWOFntNE7vUMjgdtwQIMnB6KpOr9zG5ETrEu sy6UNc3tra9KPeC41nvU4/MKrn1nXJ52+Uzfr50X55+8l7uyI+3mZZ7AdhPpcGqcAi /uyRHoz8mwwluL9Y/g/3u7BjLNDsV3JHcO1zZxp5r9Nf0osqUywzOscKb6oFTGPNjI fCZdnhPcI9ATg== Received: by paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1C2425C00F6; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 17:19:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 17:19:10 -0800 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Masami Hiramatsu Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, akpm@linux-foundation.org, ndesaulniers@google.com, vbabka@suse.cz, hannes@cmpxchg.org, joel@joelfernandes.org, quic_neeraju@quicinc.com, urezki@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC bootconfig] Allow forcing unconditional bootconfig processing Message-ID: <20230225011910.GV2948950@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> Reply-To: paulmck@kernel.org References: <20230105005838.GA1772817@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> <20230108002215.c18df95b19acdd3207b379fa@kernel.org> <20230107162202.GA4028633@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> <20230225011306.0dd47e760f502b6787096bf7@kernel.org> <20230224163307.GN2948950@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> <20230225095811.926a8ebaee4ca2d1fb9d9e45@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20230225095811.926a8ebaee4ca2d1fb9d9e45@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 09:58:11AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 08:33:07 -0800 > "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2023 at 01:13:06AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > Hi Geert, > > > > > > On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 09:31:50 +0100 > > > Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Paul, > > > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 7, 2023 at 5:33 PM Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 12:22:15AM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote: > > > > > > BTW, maybe CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED is better to select this. > > > > > > (or at least recommend to enable this) > > > > > > > > > > Like this? > > > > > > > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > > > commit d09a1505c51a70da38b34ac38062977299aef742 > > > > > Author: Paul E. McKenney > > > > > Date: Sat Jan 7 08:09:22 2023 -0800 > > > > > > > > > > bootconfig: Default BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE to y if BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED > > > > > > > > > > When a kernel is built with CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED=y, the intention > > > > > will normally be to unconditionally provide the specified kernel-boot > > > > > arguments to the kernel, as opposed to requiring a separately provided > > > > > bootconfig parameter. Therefore, make the BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE Kconfig > > > > > option default to y in kernels built with CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED=y. > > > > > > > > > > The old semantics may be obtained by manually overriding this default. > > > > > > > > > > Suggested-by: Masami Hiramatsu > > > > > Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/init/Kconfig b/init/Kconfig > > > > > index 0fb19fa0edba9..97a0f14d9020d 100644 > > > > > --- a/init/Kconfig > > > > > +++ b/init/Kconfig > > > > > @@ -1379,6 +1379,7 @@ config BOOT_CONFIG > > > > > config BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE > > > > > bool "Force unconditional bootconfig processing" > > > > > depends on BOOT_CONFIG > > > > > + default y if BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED > > > > > help > > > > > With this Kconfig option set, BOOT_CONFIG processing is carried > > > > > out even when the "bootconfig" kernel-boot parameter is omitted. > > > > > > > > Thanks for your patch, which is now commit 6ded8a28ed80e4cc > > > > ("bootconfig: Default BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE to y if BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED"). > > > > > > > > After this change, an all{mod,yes}config kernel has: > > > > > > > > CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE=y > > > > CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED=y > > > > CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED_FILE="" > > > > > > > > Will this actually work? I haven't tried booting such a kernel yet. > > > > > > Yeah, good question. It is same as when you boot the kernel with 'bootconfig' > > > but do not add the bootconfig file to initrd. You may see below message > > > on boot log, but kernel boots normally. :) > > > > > > 'bootconfig' found on command line, but no bootconfig found > > > > > > (Maybe it is better to fix the message, because if BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE=y, this > > > will be shown without 'bootconfig' on command line.) > > > > I just tried it again, and for me it just silently ignores the bootconfig > > setup. Which is what I recall happening when I tried it when creating > > the patch. > > > > Here is the .config file pieces of interest: > > > > CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG=y > > CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE=y > > CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED=y > > CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_EMBED_FILE="" > > > > Anyone else seeing something different? > > Hmm, from the code, I think you'll see that message in early console log. > > In init/main.c: > > ---- > #ifdef CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG > /* Is bootconfig on command line? */ > static bool bootconfig_found = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE); > static size_t initargs_offs; > #else > ---- > And > ---- > static void __init setup_boot_config(void) > { > ... > strscpy(tmp_cmdline, boot_command_line, COMMAND_LINE_SIZE); > err = parse_args("bootconfig", tmp_cmdline, NULL, 0, 0, 0, NULL, > bootconfig_params); > > if (IS_ERR(err) || !bootconfig_found) > return; > > /* parse_args() stops at the next param of '--' and returns an address */ > if (err) > initargs_offs = err - tmp_cmdline; > > if (!data) { > pr_err("'bootconfig' found on command line, but no bootconfig found\n"); > return; > } > ---- > > Thus, if CONFIG_BOOT_CONFIG_FORCE=y, the process passes the below check > > if (IS_ERR(err) || !bootconfig_found) > return; > > But since we have an empty 'data', the error should be printed. And you are quite right, the runs without data files did get me this: 'bootconfig' found on command line, but no bootconfig found Please accept my apologies for my confusion. Thanx, Paul > Thank you, > > > > > Thanx, Paul > > > > > Thank you! > > > > > > > > > > > Gr{oetje,eeting}s, > > > > > > > > Geert > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org > > > > > > > > In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But > > > > when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that. > > > > -- Linus Torvalds > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) > > > -- > Masami Hiramatsu (Google)