From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Grant Likely Subject: Re: [PATCH] dt/flattree: Fix return value of early_init_dt_scan_memory Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 20:44:58 -0600 Message-ID: References: <1303225269-10092-1-git-send-email-shawn.guo@linaro.org> <1303260446.28913.4.camel@pororo> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1303260446.28913.4.camel@pororo> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: Jeremy Kerr Cc: devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, linaro-kernel-cunTk1MwBs8s++Sfvej+rw@public.gmane.org, patches-QSEj5FYQhm4dnm+yROfE0A@public.gmane.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:47 PM, Jeremy Kerr wrote: > Hi Shawn, > >> It fixes the return value of funciont early_init_dt_scan_memory on >> the success return path. > > [In general, the changelog should explain why you're making this change, > not just re-iterate what the patch does. Does this fix a problem you > were seeing?] > > With regards to this specific patch - I don't think this is correct; if > we return 1 here, we'll abort the of_scan_flat_dt loop after > successfully parsing one memory node, whereas machines may have multiple > nodes. This change will break booting on those machines. > > Cheers, Yes, the current code is correct. All of the memory nodes are supposed to be processed. g.