[PATCH 1/2] riscv: Use correct version of fdtdec_get_addr_size

[Atish Patra]

On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:19 AM Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Atish,
>
> On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 3:04 PM Atish Patra <atishp at atishpatra.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 5:46 PM Bin Meng <bmeng.cn at gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Atish,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 7:51 AM Atish Patra <atish.patra at wdc.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > fdtdec_get_addr_size uses a fixed value for address_cells & size_cells
> > > > which may not work correctly always. fdtdec_get_addr_size_no_parent
> > > > will automatically calculate the cell sizes from parent but not
> > > > optimized especially when parent node is already available with the
> > > > caller.
> > > >
> > > > Use fdtdec_get_addr_size_auto_parent that automatically calculate the
> > > > cell sizes and optimized for the given usecase.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra at wdc.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/riscv/lib/fdt_fixup.c | 2 +-
> > > >  lib/fdtdec.c               | 3 ++-
> > > >  2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/lib/fdt_fixup.c b/arch/riscv/lib/fdt_fixup.c
> > > > index 6db48ad04a56..f2ec37b57b15 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/riscv/lib/fdt_fixup.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/lib/fdt_fixup.c
> > > > @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ int riscv_fdt_copy_resv_mem_node(const void *src, void *dst)
> > > >         fdt_for_each_subnode(node, src, offset) {
> > > >                 name = fdt_get_name(src, node, NULL);
> > > >
> > > > -               addr = fdtdec_get_addr_size_auto_noparent(src, node,
> > > > +               addr = fdtdec_get_addr_size_auto_parent(src, offset, node,
> > > >                                                           "reg", 0, &size,
> > > >                                                           false);
> > > >                 if (addr == FDT_ADDR_T_NONE) {
> > > > diff --git a/lib/fdtdec.c b/lib/fdtdec.c
> > > > index 1f2b763acc31..b62eb142ccc3 100644
> > > > --- a/lib/fdtdec.c
> > > > +++ b/lib/fdtdec.c
> > > > @@ -1296,7 +1296,8 @@ int fdtdec_add_reserved_memory(void *blob, const char *basename,
> > > >                 const char *name = fdt_get_name(blob, node, NULL);
> > > >                 phys_addr_t addr, size;
> > > >
> > > > -               addr = fdtdec_get_addr_size(blob, node, "reg", &size);
> > > > +               addr = fdtdec_get_addr_size_auto_parent(blob, parent, node,
> > > > +                                                       "reg", 0, &size, false);
> > >
> > > There is already a patch for this change (although slightly different,
> > > but fixed the same thing)
> > > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/1591767391-2669-2-git-send-email-bmeng.cn@gmail.com/
> > >
> >
> > Ah I missed that. I used this version compared to
> > fdtdec_get_addr_size_fixed because of the following comment
> > in the header file.
> >
> > "You probably don't want to use this function directly except to parse
> > non-standard properties, and never to parse the "reg" property. Instead,
> > use one of the "auto" variants below, which automatically honor the
> > #address-cells and #size-cells properties in the parent node."
> >
> > Do you want to update your patch or I can send v2 by splitting riscv &
> > generic changes ?
> > Please let me know your preference.
>
> I intended to use fdtdec_get_addr_size_fixed() because na and ns are
> already known at this point. Calling
> fdtdec_get_addr_size_auto_parent() duplicates the efforts of getting
> values of na and ns, and is not necessary.
>

Yes. But the duplication effort is just reading two parameters.
Anyways, it's not a big deal. I will drop the generic fix from my
patch and resent after
rebasing on top of your series.

> >
> > > Please also send them in separate patches in the future, as one is
> > > RISC-V specific and the other one is for generic codes.
>
> Regards,
> Bin



-- 
Regards,
Atish