Re: [PATCH v3 00/24] Remove COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from uapi

From: Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@rivosinc.com>
To: Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>
Cc: hca@linux.ibm.com, geert@linux-m68k.org, corbet@lwn.net,
	 Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@linaro.org>,
	ink@jurassic.park.msu.ru, mattst88@gmail.com,  vgupta@kernel.org,
	linux@armlinux.org.uk,  Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	chenhuacai@kernel.org,  kernel@xen0n.name, monstr@monstr.eu,
	tsbogend@alpha.franken.de,
	 James.Bottomley@hansenpartnership.com, deller@gmx.de,
	mpe@ellerman.id.au,  npiggin@gmail.com,
	christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu,
	 Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, gor@linux.ibm.com,
	 agordeev@linux.ibm.com, borntraeger@linux.ibm.com,
	svens@linux.ibm.com,  ysato@users.sourceforge.jp,
	dalias@libc.org, davem@davemloft.net,  tglx@linutronix.de,
	mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de,  dave.hansen@linux.intel.com,
	x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, chris@zankel.net,
	 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
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 08:57:08 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAHVXubgdr_NrLPnZ6NhuDt8uZYZD+R_swpCVGoLDxnD+eOJcuA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <mhng-e8b09772-24e5-4729-a0bf-01a9e4c76636@palmer-ri-x1c9a>

On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 4:17 AM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 14 Feb 2023 01:19:02 PST (-0800), hca@linux.ibm.com wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 09:58:17AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> >> Hi Heiko,
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 9:39 AM Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com> wrote:
> >> > 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.
>
> Thanks, I guess I'd missed that one.  At some point I think there was
> some discussion of making this a Kconfig for everyone, which seems
> reasonable to me -- our use case for this being extended is syzkaller,
> but we're sort of just picking a value that's big enough for now and
> running with it.
>
> Probably best to get it out of uapi first, though, as that way at least
> it's clear that it's not uABI.
>
> >> Commit 622021cd6c560ce7 ("s390: make command line configurable"),
> >> I assume?
> >
> > Yes, sorry for that. I got distracted while writing and used the wrong
> > branch to look this up.
>
> Alex: Probably worth adding that to the list in the cover letter as it
> looks like you were planning on a v4 anyway (which I guess you now have
> to do, given that I just added the issue to RISC-V).

Yep, I will :)

Thanks,

Alex

_______________________________________________
linux-snps-arc mailing list
linux-snps-arc@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-snps-arc