From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Gibson Subject: Re: [PATCH] libfdt.h: Define FDT_PATH_MAX Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2017 14:43:58 +1000 Message-ID: <20170710044358.GA4083@umbus.fritz.box> References: <1497451908-15367-1-git-send-email-pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> <20170614150522.GE2614@umbus> <1497468241.28265.22.camel@hp800z> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="azLHFNyN32YCQGCU" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1497468241.28265.22.camel@hp800z> Sender: devicetree-compiler-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Pantelis Antoniou Cc: Tom Rini , Nishanth Menon , Tero Kristo , Frank Rowand , Rob Herring , Simon Glass , Devicetree Compiler , devicetree-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 10:24:01PM +0300, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > Hi David, >=20 > On Wed, 2017-06-14 at 23:05 +0800, David Gibson wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 05:51:48PM +0300, Pantelis Antoniou wrote: > > > Declare the maximum path size of an FDT node. > > > It is useful for manipulation methods that need to know a maximum val= ue. > > >=20 > > > Signed-off-by: Pantelis Antoniou > >=20 > > Why do you need this. I've really tried to avoid adding arbitrary > > size limits on things. > >=20 >=20 > The stacked overlay patch needs it; has to 'read' in a path into a > buffer and manipulate it. Otherwise it I would have to add a new method > that walks the path and returns the size of it so that I can allocate > the exact amount. This seems excessive IMO compared to a hard max limit. >=20 > It is similar to the way PATH_MAX works in *nix which makes things > somewhat familiar. This is not necessary. As noted elsewhere, I'm not really convinced of the need of the stacked overlay application patch at all. But even if we took that approach I can see fairly straightforward ways to eliminate the need for a PATH_MAX (removing the arbitrary limit with it). --=20 David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_ | _way_ _around_! http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJZYwYMAAoJEGw4ysog2bOSi1IQAMIvK2eRn0/t9LPCLAe5wgnd KQ3b/KOx8cZkgrcazCd9ZrFJuaAkY+Xxv9SY0yrOQygfNZKonqgFcrB5D/Kmb0oy w3CsQ6T5UH4Ji3+NkQ5f7YQm8Yrhjc/krmLDI+/sUzYrGUPRLtXNRZLme6oHyK7P WqPVXunlrCsr1nVUGDuSa2774ebJetfBUErED6f9QOCgg9nr1A7lrjMdear2nvud r3/+B2HJPKW5jHKAcf217lbV0OFzB1RsYMXjNt7IwA5+0HUgpaUsrullUHSb6qhN GF2UxJ8bdRV307giQh5kaSQ5vsb+f5rV7dVjMJJnnq+MLVdzUG7xJbn/qzidqaT9 UegqINCoJ/ZYBvJDTo2ZOXpb4f2SAwvqgfIOlW3XWfHXNf1XInxsmGRimdJdm1MN qDseTUCXpZvDQHZahfI+0NRG9ocdx4/+cuPvWacNTVV4XR7gGhCvXxtX498J4kyE 12VtRUrVDu1Zlq9OZZa2RRKrY05rYH2jTjMELh9wmB5CrTZq9Xyia/a6dk283wEU y6A2zASIySQ3ZBaDU/VtY3dkW54D0OtW5bNF6pNtXDOBk0/LYnjpALLOOPUG9UhF TNhjEFFztsBcnkI1LQmq7p5R4B3sqocA/K74uEPtXYIXXk//qgdGIzq9wgocEshF f1Dqj7d+BA5QLhtQAVn0 =MAl+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --azLHFNyN32YCQGCU--