From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 10:51:21 -0400 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH] fdt_support: Check for bank size before updating memory node In-Reply-To: <1445524444-16113-1-git-send-email-lokeshvutla@ti.com> References: <1445524444-16113-1-git-send-email-lokeshvutla@ti.com> Message-ID: <20151022145121.GD23893@bill-the-cat> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 08:04:04PM +0530, Lokesh Vutla wrote: > In case if one of the bank that is passed is of size zero, then u-boot > will be updating memory node with a bank of size zero. There is not need > to update memory node if size is zero, so check for bank size before is not. > updating. > > Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla > --- > common/fdt_support.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/common/fdt_support.c b/common/fdt_support.c > index f86365e..0019eef 100644 > --- a/common/fdt_support.c > +++ b/common/fdt_support.c > @@ -401,6 +401,9 @@ static int fdt_pack_reg(const void *fdt, void *buf, u64 *address, u64 *size, > char *p = buf; > > for (i = 0; i < n; i++) { > + if (size[i] == 0) > + continue; > + > if (address_cells == 2) > *(fdt64_t *)p = cpu_to_fdt64(address[i]); > else So I suggested something along these lines a long while ago as part of how to fix the problem of DT has correct (and larger than U-Boot can see) memory size, so I like the change. But it's a "big" behavior change that we (I) need to note in the release notes at least. When I looked last things were either setting a 0 size or a correct looking size, but I bet we'll still see a few things drop out wrt incorrect (too small) memory size being passed. I wonder what the best list(s) would be to let everyone know about this would be... -- Tom -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: