Re: [PATCH][TAKE 3] THE LINUX/I386 BOOT PROTOCOL - Breaking the 256limit

[H. Peter Anvin]

Alon Bar-Lev wrote:
> H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > Well, obviously, since apparently LILO doesn't properly null-terminate 
> > long command line.
> >
> > Thinking about it a bit, the way to deal with the LILO problem is 
> > probably to actually *usw* the boot loader ID byte we've had in there 
> > since the 2.00 protocol.  In other words, if the boot loader ID is 
> > 0x1X where X <= current version (I don't know how LILO manages this 
> > ID) then truncate the command line to 255 bytes; when this is fixed in 
> > LILO then LILO gets to bump its boot loader ID version number.
> >
> >     -hpa
>
> I don't understand...
>
> If LILO worked until now, it should continue to work after applying this 
> patch, since nothing was changed from its perspective. It will continue 
> to provide 255 characters + null command line, so even if you have 1024 
> max command-line, then you will still receive truncated to 255 chars.

Does anyone know the actual details of the LILO breakage?  If the 
problem is that LILO doesn't null-terminate the string when it's too 
long, then we can deal with this automatically, without introducing 
compile-time options (which were already once rejected.)

If the problem is with LILO booting *old* kernels, then that's going to 
have to require some LILO changes, and probably a boot revision bump.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/