Re: [PATCH v4 00/24] Remove COMMAND_LINE_SIZE from uapi

[Alexandre Ghiti]

On 3/2/23 11:44, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 11:09 AM Alexandre Ghiti <alex@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 3/2/23 10:47, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 10:35 AM Alexandre Ghiti <alexghiti@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 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.
> > > >
> > > > This issue was already considered in s390 and they reached the same
> > > > conclusion in commit 622021cd6c56 ("s390: make command line
> > > > configurable").
> > > >
> > > > 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.
> > > >
> > > > Changes since v3 <https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230214074925.228106-1-alexghiti@xxxxxxxxxxxx/>:
> > > > * Added RB/AB
> > > > * Added a mention to commit 622021cd6c56 ("s390: make command line
> > > >     configurable") in the cover letter
> > > Thanks for the update!
> > >
> > >    Apparently you forgot to add your own SoB?
> > I do not know, should I? Palmer did all the work, I only fixed 3 minor
> > things
> If you are picking up patches, and submitting them to someone else
> for upstream inclusion, you should add your own SoB.
> https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst#L419


Great, thanks for the pointer, I'll do that then!


Thanks again,


Alex


> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
>                          Geert