Re: libfdt: a fix but still broken

[Jon Loeliger <jdl@jdl.com>]

So, like, the other day David Gibson mumbled:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 08:27:29AM -0500, Jerry Van Baren wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> > 
> > I have good news and bad news. ;-)  The good news is that the 
> > incompatibility between libfdt and jdl's dtc is that libfdt has the name 
> > offset and the length of the name switched.  booting_without_of.txt says 
> > the length comes first, so libfdt is in the wrong.
> 
> Ouch.  That's.. a very embarrassing bug.  Actually, I know where it
> came from: I was looking at flat_dt.h from dtc, which also gets this
> wrong (but the declaration in question is unused).  Of course, I also
> wrote flat_dt.h ...
> 
> > The bad news is that, when I fix this, nearly all of the tests fail (but 
> > they fail the same way for both tree.S and jdl's dtc).  I have not 
> > started on that layer of the onion yet.
> 
> Found it, there was a direct use of the position of the length in
> _fdt_next_tag().  Just pushed out a fix for this in the libfdt tree,
> along with some other small fixes which I found while tracking this
> one down.
> 
> Oh, incidentally, I applied your patch by eye rather than with
> patch(1), which was handy, because it appears to have been whitespace
> damaged.

And amidst all of this, is there an actual DTC change needed?
I've not detected one yet, but I'm watching... :-)

jdl