[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256 limit
Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> Hello Peter, I've written a reply before but got no response...
> The idea of putting arguments in initramfs is not practical, since the
> whole idea is to have the same image of system and affecting its
> behavior using the boot loader...

No, you're wrong. The boot loader can synthesize an initramfs.

> I would like to push forward the idea to extend the command-line size...
> All we need for start is an updated version of the "THE LINUX/I386 BOOT
> PROTOCOL" document that states that in the 2.02+ protocol the boot
> loader should set cmd_line_ptr to a pointer to a null terminated string
> without any size restriction, specifying that the kernel will read as
> much as it can.

Already pushed to Andrew. I will follow it up with a patch to extend
the command line, at least to 512.

> After I get this update, I will try to work with GRUB and LILO so that
> they will fix their implementation. Currently they claim that they
> understand that they should truncate the string to 256.
> After that I will provide my simple patch for setting the maximum size
> the kernel allocates in the configuration.
> BTW: Do you know why the COMMAND_LINE_SIZE constant is located in two
> separate include files?

No, I don't. It could be because one is included from assembly code in
the i386 architecture.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-09-06 22:43    [W:0.100 / U:2.940 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site