Hi Doug,
On 3/8/22 08:04, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2022 at 7:32 PM Randy Dunlap <rdun...@infradead.org> wrote:
>>
>> __setup() handlers should return 1 to indicate that the boot option
>> has been handled. A return of 0 causes the boot option/value to be
>> listed as an Unknown kernel parameter and added to init's (limited)
>> environment strings. So return 1 from kgdboc_option_setup().
>
> This took me about 20 minutes to trace through the code to confirm,
> but it appears you're correct. It's pretty twisted that early_param()
> and __setup(), both of which add things to the same list, work exactly
> opposite here. :( Any chance I could convince you to:
>
> 1. Add a comment before the definition of __setup_param() explaining
> that 0 means error and 1 means no error. There's a comment next to
> early_param() that _implies_ that setup is the opposite(), but it'd be
> nice to see documentation of __setup(). I know __setup() is supposed
> to be "only for core code", but still seems like we could document it.
I have already done this. The patch is in Andrew's mmotm tree (patch queue).
> 2. Add something to your commit message helping someone find the place
> where the return value is checked. Basically just mention
> obsolete_checksetup() to give people a hint.
>
Sure, no problem. Good idea.
>
>> Unknown kernel command line parameters "BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/bzImage-517rc7
>> kgdboc=kbd kgdbts=", will be passed to user space.
>>
>> Run /sbin/init as init process
>> with arguments:
>> /sbin/init
>> with environment:
>> HOME=/
>> TERM=linux
>> BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/bzImage-517rc7
>> kgdboc=kbd
>> kgdbts=
>>
>> Fixes: 1cd25cbb2fed ("kgdboc: Fix warning with module build")
>
> Are you certain about this "Fixes" line? That commit was just code
> motion to move the code inside the #ifdef. It sure looks like it was
> broken even before this.
>
Yes, but I am not enough of a git user to be able to backtrack
to see where this code was added. :(
(help?)
>
>> Signed-off-by: Randy Dunlap <rdun...@infradead.org>
>> Reported-by: Igor Zhbanov <i.zhba...@omprussia.ru>
>> Link: lore.kernel.org/r/64644a2f-4a20-bab3-1e15-3b2cdd0de...@omprussia.ru
>> Cc: Laura Abbott <labb...@redhat.com>
>> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>
>> Cc: Jiri Slaby <jirisl...@kernel.org>
>> Cc: kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net
>> Cc: Jason Wessel <jason.wes...@windriver.com>
>> Cc: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thomp...@linaro.org>
>> Cc: Douglas Anderson <diand...@chromium.org>
>> Cc: linux-ser...@vger.kernel.org
>> ---
>> drivers/tty/serial/kgdboc.c | 6 +++---
>> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> --- lnx-517-rc7.orig/drivers/tty/serial/kgdboc.c
>> +++ lnx-517-rc7/drivers/tty/serial/kgdboc.c
>> @@ -403,16 +403,16 @@ static int kgdboc_option_setup(char *opt
>> {
>> if (!opt) {
>> pr_err("config string not provided\n");
>> - return -EINVAL;
>> + return 1;
>
> Shouldn't it return 0 in the error cases? If __setup() functions are
> supposed to return "1" no matter what then what was the purpose of
> having a return value in the first place?
It should return 0 if the string(s) should be added to init's arg or env
strings, which is probably very rare. I don't know why it has a return
value in the first place. Someone else has already suggested that __setup()
functions should be void. Maybe they should one day, but that's a much
larger patch.
I'll send a v2.
thanks.
--
~Randy
_______________________________________________
Kgdb-bugreport mailing list
Kgdb-bugreport@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kgdb-bugreport
