Hi,
Has this issue been dropped?  I will need secure boot at some point (which 
apparently would resolve the issue), but for now I want to be able to pass 
more parameters.  My current parameters could probably be scaled back to be 
less than 255, but I change them quite a bit.  For example, if I want to 
enable dynamic debug messages at boot, the kernel parameters get large 
quickly - I need to set parameters for each of the files that I want to 
track.  

For my purposes, I have no need to be backward compatible.  I'm wondering 
if the patch is as simple as increasing ENV_STRING_LENGTH in envdata.h, or 
if there are other things that need to be considered.

Chris

On Monday, June 20, 2022 at 5:38:29 AM UTC-4 Jan Kiszka wrote:

> On 20.06.22 11:17, Mou, ChengShu(Ben) (DI FA CTR SVC CN) wrote:
> > Yes, unified kernel image could be a workaround for this issue. However, 
> we need to integrate swupdate, the root command will be specified in run 
> time not in build time.
>
> You won't do secure boot then?
>
> If you will, dynamic reconfiguration via cgroupv2 is long-term the only
> option. The kernel command line is security relevant, thus can't be
> generated on-the-fly but must be signed, and that can only happen offline.
>
> Jan
>
> > I don't know if there is a way that we can modify this command in 
> swupdate. Adding a handler for it can be a way but it will need a big 
> effort.
> > 
> > With best regards,
> > Cheng Shu Mou
> > 
> > Siemens Ltd., China
> > RC-CN DI FA BL IE
> > Tianyuan road No.99
> > 611731 CHENGDU, China 
> > mailto:[email protected]
> > www.siemens.com
> > 
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Kiszka, Jan (T CED) <[email protected]> 
> > Sent: Friday, June 17, 2022 4:12 PM
> > To: Mou, ChengShu(Ben) (DI FA CTR SVC CN) <[email protected]>
> > Cc: [email protected]; Schmidt, Adriaan (T CED SES-DE) <
> [email protected]>; Schild, Henning (T CED SES-DE) <
> [email protected]>
> > Subject: Re: Length limitation for kernel parameters
> > 
> > On 13.06.22 11:27, Jan Kiszka wrote:
> >> On 13.06.22 10:46, Henning Schild wrote:
> >>> Am Mon, 13 Jun 2022 09:24:52 +0200
> >>> schrieb Jan Kiszka <[email protected]>:
> >>>
> >>>> On 10.06.22 10:38, Mou, ChengShu(Ben) wrote:
> >>>>> Thanks for your reply. Unfortunately, the parameters can't be 
> >>>>> reduced. This kernel is well-tuned for special real time purpose. I 
> >>>>> think we should find another way to solve this issue.
> >>>>
> >>>> Henning, Adriaan, do we really have to create such long lines with 
> >>>> isolcpus, rcu_nocbs & Co. that would exceed 256 chars easily? If so, 
> >>>> this topic needs to be prioritized.
> >>>
> >>> I just checked one target booting with preempt and several tuning 
> >>> params.
> >>>
> >>> $ wc -c /proc/cmdline
> >>> 424 /proc/cmdline
> >>>
> >>
> >> OK - will likely only drop when deprecating isolcpus and related 
> >> boot-time configurations.
> >>
> >>> I bet one could drop or shorten some, but going up to 1k or simply 4k 
> >>> might be a good idea. The number should probably be taken from what 
> >>> the kernel has, or what other bootloaders might have hardcoded.
> >>
> >> For v2 of the file format, we will surely not go for any hard-coded 
> >> sizes anymore.
> >>
> > 
> > Forgot to mention a workaround that is already available: unified kernel 
> image [1] (on x86, you could also use the unified kernel image stub and 
> tooling of systemd-boot). In that case, the command line is built into that 
> image, and that is not size-constrained. You can use that also for 
> non-secure boot - and you must use that anyway if you want to do secure 
> boot.
> > 
> > Jan
> > 
> > [1]
> > 
> https://github.com/siemens/efibootguard/blob/master/docs/UNIFIED-KERNEL.md
> > 
> > --
> > Siemens AG, Technology
> > Competence Center Embedded Linux
>
> -- 
> Siemens AG, Technology
> Competence Center Embedded Linux
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "EFI 
Boot Guard" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/efibootguard-dev/5ff18408-5d76-4a7a-8d31-232c0f9c266bn%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to