[U-Boot] [PATCH] fdt_support: Check for bank size before updating memory node

[Lokesh Vutla <a0131933@ti.com>]

On Thursday 22 October 2015 08:21 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
> 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.
Oops. will correct it in v2.

> 
>> updating.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Lokesh Vutla <lokeshvutla@ti.com>
>> ---
>>  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...

Shall I take this as your Reviewed-by ? Not sure about how to let
everyone know about this. Please let me know to whom all I have to cc
for posting v2 of this patch.

Thanks and regards,
Lokesh
>