On Wed, Jan 16, 2008 at 02:49:39PM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 10:52:30AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 11:16:57AM +1100, David Gibson wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:30:04AM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
[snip]
> > > > + if (depth != 0)
> > > > + return -FDT_ERR_BADSTRUCTURE;
> > >
> > > I think this should be FDT_ERR_TRUNCATED.
> >
> > I'd expect TRUNCATED when we hit totalsize without an FDT_END, not when
> > we hit FDT_END in an inappropriate context.
>
> Well, TRUNCATED is valid for either situation, and fdt_next_tag() also
> returns FDT_END if it reaches totalsize.
Thought I should elaborate on this a bit - I'm not sure that the
current handling of FDT_ERR_TRUNCATED is entirely correct. The
description says only when the FDT_END tag is missing, but the way
fdt_next_tag() works means we will also (for some functions, at least)
give this error when FDT_END appears without a suitable number of
FDT_END_NODE tags preceding it.
The rationale behind FDT_ERR_TRUNCATED - why it exists as a separate
code from FDT_ERR_BADSTRUCTURE - is that the read-only functions
should work more-or-less sanely on incomplete trees created by the
sequential-write functions (fdt_sw.c). FDT_ERR_TRUNCATED is supposed
to indicate that the function couldn't complete properly because the
tree is malformed, but that suitable calls to the fdt_sw functions
could complete the tree so that it's no longer malformed.
I'm not sure that either the comment describing TRUNCATED, or the code
entirely matches that rationale...
--
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
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
