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

[Daniel Walker (danielwa)]

On Thu, Oct 02, 2025 at 02:55:07PM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 10/2/25 14:31, Daniel Walker (danielwa) wrote:
> ...
> >> BTW, your series looks like a *really* good idea. Please don't let it
> >> die. But you might want to trim it down a bit. I'd probably remove the
> >> tests and the 'insert-sys-cert' changes to make it more approachable to
> >> folks.
> > 
> > Since x86 is asking for it I think it would trim it down to just
> > what is needed for x86. If I don't trim down the architectures it
> > ropes in too many people anyway.
> 
> 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.

ARM64 has also request this series in the past, but I don't know what their
current code looks like since my last submissions.

> > The biggest issue is that libstub would need to be modified, but
> > I've never had any luck getting the libstub maintainer to review
> > anything. I suspect he would ignore private email too, particularly
> > from people he's doesn't know.
> 
> Are you talking about Ard?
> 
> 	EXTENSIBLE FIRMWARE INTERFACE (EFI)
> 	M:      Ard Biesheuvel <ardb at kernel.org>
> 	L:      linux-efi at vger.kernel.org
> 	S:      Maintained
> 	...
> 	F:      drivers/firmware/efi/
> 	F:      include/linux/efi*.h

Yes I think so.

> He's a pretty nice guy and has been active in this thread, so I'm kinda
> surprised to hear you're having a hard time there. I'd just try asking
> nicely. I'm pretty sure he's "ardb" on the usual IRC networks. IRC is a
> great alternative when you're having problems getting your emails seen
> in the normal email flood.

That was the first response from him over many submissions. Which channels are
popular on IRC ?

> BTW, reading the changelog for libstub, it wasn't clear to me that
> changes there were _required_ for the series to go forward. For
> instance, is the x86 patch useful without libstub changes?

I think it is required because x86 can be compiled with libstub and the 
changes take effect for the whole kernel when compiled for that architecture.
libstub uses the Kconfig options directly which I modify in the series, so there
would need to be some compatibility changes.

Daniel