I actually clung to Passwords - Whonix.
As refered to by @adw, I chose such a long passphrase because it is way easier to remember, it is more secure (you can generate your own dictionary with crazy words - my opinion -) and I wanted a password already good for Quantum Computing (who knows what is brewing in the dungeons of some big tech companies or state research facilities).
What @adw did not highlight is that the entropy of your passphrase depends on the size of the dictionary you use.
So you cannot easily say that 10-12 diceware words are sufficient if you have a language with a smaller dictionary than english or just not a full - every word containing - dictionary at hand.
The calculations from security experts are that. They are professional calculations and do not necessarily consider every day life circumstances.
Guys I do not really get why somebody who is using a security orientated OS would tell me to take a shorter passphrase.
I just get around the 130 bit entropy.
Passphrases are in my opinion a way to better password security a lot compared to passwords like:“10aqpakfoeakdvm011”. Who can remember this?
LUKS is supporting accoridng to cryptsetup --help 512 characters of length. So my password with 100 characters is actually just 1/5 of the supported length.
I think every bug in LUKS or the implementation of it in Qubes is a matter to look into. If I only have one try to enter my password lets say bigger than 100 characters, it could mean LUKS is not integrated correctly or there is some bug in LUKS.
The limitation of being kicked after one try discourage people to use secure passwords.
Maybe someone got a test-machine (I unfortunatly got none) and has time to test this baviour.