From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <Wei.Yang@windriver.com>
Received: from mail1.windriver.com (mail1.windriver.com [147.11.146.13])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D30161A02AF
 for <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>; Tue, 17 Jun 2014 17:07:57 +1000 (EST)
Message-ID: <539FDA38.8080705@windriver.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Jun 2014 14:03:36 +0800
From: "Yang,Wei" <Wei.Yang@windriver.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Yang,Wei" <Wei.Yang@windriver.com>, <Wei.Yang@windriver.com>,
 <horms@verge.net.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] fs2dt: Refine kdump device_tree sort
References: <1402550168-7826-1-git-send-email-Wei.Yang@windriver.com>
 <539FD9A9.1070307@windriver.com>
In-Reply-To: <539FD9A9.1070307@windriver.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List <linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/options/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
List-Help: <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev>,
 <mailto:linuxppc-dev-request@lists.ozlabs.org?subject=subscribe>

Simon, I missed "kexec" string in subject, so please ignore this 
version. I would resend it with adding "kexec" in subject.

Thanks
Wei
On 06/17/2014 02:01 PM, Yang,Wei wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> How about this patch?
>
> Thanks
> Wei
> On 06/12/2014 01:16 PM, Wei.Yang@windriver.com wrote:
>> From: Yang Wei <Wei.Yang@windriver.com>
>>
>> The commit b02d735bf was to rearrange the device-tree entries, and
>> assumed that these entries are sorted in the ascending order. but
>> acctually when I was validating kexec and kdump, the order of
>> serial node still is changed. We should not only compare the length
>> of directory name, but also compare the directory name, it would
>> ensure that the order of device node is really in ascending order.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Yang Wei <Wei.Yang@windriver.com>
>> ---
>>   kexec/fs2dt.c |   13 ++++++++++---
>>   1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>>         It is validated on Freescale t4240qds.
>>
>> diff --git a/kexec/fs2dt.c b/kexec/fs2dt.c
>> index 1e5f074..0bffaf5 100644
>> --- a/kexec/fs2dt.c
>> +++ b/kexec/fs2dt.c
>> @@ -479,6 +479,9 @@ static int comparefunc(const struct dirent 
>> **dentry1,
>>   {
>>       char *str1 = (*(struct dirent **)dentry1)->d_name;
>>       char *str2 = (*(struct dirent **)dentry2)->d_name;
>> +    char* ptr1 = strchr(str1, '@');
>> +    char* ptr2 = strchr(str2, '@');
>> +    int len1, len2;
>>         /*
>>        * strcmp scans from left to right and fails to idetify for some
>> @@ -486,9 +489,13 @@ static int comparefunc(const struct dirent 
>> **dentry1,
>>        * Therefore, we get the wrong sorted order like 
>> memory@10000000 and
>>        * memory@f000000.
>>        */
>> -    if (strchr(str1, '@') && strchr(str2, '@') &&
>> -        (strlen(str1) > strlen(str2)))
>> -        return 1;
>> +    if (ptr1 && ptr2) {
>> +        len1 = ptr1 - str1;
>> +        len2 = ptr2 - str2;
>> +        if (!strncmp(str1, str2, len1 >len2 ? len1: len2) &&
>> +                    (strlen(str1) > strlen(str2)))
>> +                return 1;
>> +    }
>>         return strcmp(str1, str2);
>>   }
>
>
>