On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 11:30:42PM +0900, Masami Hiramatsu wrote:
On Wed, 25 Mar 2026 23:22:04 +0900
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
quoted
+ /*
+ * Keys that do not match any early_param() handler are silently
+ * ignored — do_early_param() always returns 0.
+ */
+ xbc_node_for_each_key_value(root, knode, val) {
[sashiko comment]
| Does this loop handle array values correctly?
| xbc_node_for_each_key_value() only assigns the first value of an array to
| the val pointer before advancing to the next key. It does not iterate over
| the child nodes of the array.
| If the bootconfig contains a multi-value key like
| kernel.console = "ttyS0", "tty0", will the subsequent values in the array
| be silently dropped instead of passed to the early_param handlers?
Also, good catch :) we need to use xbc_node_for_each_array_value()
for inner loop.
FYI, xbc_snprint_cmdline() translates the arraied parameter as
multiple parameters. For example,
foo = bar, buz;
will be converted to
foo=bar foo=buz
Thus, I think we should do the same thing below;
quoted
quoted
+ if (xbc_node_compose_key_after(root, knode, xbc_namebuf, XBC_KEYLEN_MAX) < 0)
+ continue;
+
+ /*
+ * We need to copy const char *val to a char pointer,
+ * which is what do_early_param() need, given it might
+ * call strsep(), strtok() later.
+ */
+ ret = strscpy(val_buf, val, sizeof(val_buf));
+ if (ret < 0) {
+ pr_warn("ignoring bootconfig value '%s', too long\n",
+ xbc_namebuf);
+ continue;
+ }
+ do_early_param(xbc_namebuf, val_buf, NULL, NULL);
So instead of this;
xbc_array_for_each_value(vnode, val) {
do_early_param(xbc_namebuf, val, NULL, NULL);
}
Maybe it is a good timing to recondier unifying kernel cmdline and bootconfig
from API viewpoint.
I'm not familiar with the history on this topic. Has unifying the APIs been
previously considered and set aside?
Given all the feedback on this series, I see three types of issues to address:
1) Minor patch improvements
2) Architecture-specific super early parameters being parsed before bootconfig
is available
3) Unifying kernel cmdline and bootconfig interfaces
Which of these areas would you recommend I prioritize?
Thanks for the guidance,
--breno