[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <17659.26177.846522.226410@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 09:33:21 +1000
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: Alon Bar-Lev <alon.barlev@...il.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...e.de>, Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@...l.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
johninsd@....rr.com, davej@...emonkey.org.uk, Riley@...liams.name,
trini@...nel.crashing.org, davem@...emloft.net, ecd@...inaid.de,
jj@...site.ms.mff.cuni.cz, anton@...ba.org, wli@...omorphy.com,
lethal@...ux-sh.org, rc@....org.uk, spyro@....com, rth@...ddle.net,
avr32@...el.com, hskinnemoen@...el.com, starvik@...s.com,
ralf@...ux-mips.org, matthew@....cx, grundler@...isc-linux.org,
geert@...ux-m68k.org, zippel@...ux-m68k.org,
schwidefsky@...ibm.com, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
uclinux-v850@....nec.co.jp, chris@...kel.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/26] Dynamic kernel command-line
Alon Bar-Lev writes:
> Current implementation stores a static command-line
> buffer allocated to COMMAND_LINE_SIZE size. Most
> architectures stores two copies of this buffer, one
> for future reference and one for parameter parsing.
Under what circumstances do we actually need a command line of more
than 256 bytes?
It seems to me that if 256 bytes isn't enough, we should take a deep
breath, step back, and think about whether there might be a better way
to pass whatever information it is that's using up so much of the
command line.
Paul.
--
VGER BF report: H 0
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists