[PATCH 6/8] CMDLINE: x86: convert to generic builtin command line

[Dave Hansen]

On 10/2/25 15:38, Daniel Gimpelevich wrote:
> On Thu, 2025-10-02 at 14:55 -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
>> That's not a bad idea. Or, even if you can pick two amenable
>> architectures to start with it will make it really obvious that this is
>> useful. Two architectures means a *lot*, IMNHO. Two is a billion times
>> better than one.
> I think it's a bad idea, if I understand it correctly. The patchset
> conceptually patches a mechanism of the kernel as a whole, but one which
> just so happens to need to be implemented separately for each arch.
> Breaking it down like you suggest creates an embarrassingly high
> likelihood of different architectures' implementations of it going out
> of sync, a previous situation that this patchset was partly intended to
> address. I say keep it atomic. If it breaks on an arch or two but not
> others and nobody notices right away, that would be better addressed
> with a new patch when someone eventually does notice. Just my 2¢…

How is the approach to "keep it atomic" working out so far? ;)

The kernel isn't exactly developed in secret. It's also not hard at all
to, say, once a week to peek at linux-next and do a lore search (or use
lei) if anyone is desperately worried about the ~50 lines per
architecture going out of sync.