[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH V1 16/29] xen/arm: Build DOM0 FDT by browsing the device tree structure
On 09/09/2013 01:39 PM, Ian Campbell wrote: On Mon, 2013-09-09 at 13:26 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:On 09/09/2013 12:33 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:On Wed, 2013-08-28 at 15:47 +0100, Julien Grall wrote:if ( early_info.modules.nr_mods >= MOD_KERNEL && early_info.modules.module[MOD_KERNEL].cmdline[0] ) bootargs = &early_info.modules.module[MOD_KERNEL].cmdline[0]; - for ( prop = fdt_first_property_offset(fdt, node); - prop >= 0; - prop = fdt_next_property_offset(fdt, prop) ) + for_each_property_of_node (np, pp)Is "of" here as in "the property of the node" or is it a stray Open Firmware from the Linux naming of these functions? Perhaps a dt_ prefix to match all the others?Right. I will send a patch to rename for_each_property_of_node to dt_for_each_property_of_node.Might dt_for_each_node_property fit better with the other functions? Sounds good. This comment is saying that the name of the name property used to be something else? What was it? Which version of FDT was that -- do we need to care?Right, on older FDT version (< 0x10) each node has 2 different name: - the name just after FDT_BEGIN_NODE in the fdt which correspond to the "filename". - the name in property "name" which is a convenient name. So we can't use the name field in device tree to retrieve the name to create the node. For the FDT version, I don't know if we need to care. Linux pays attention to it in the device tree code.I'm not sure we need to care either, I expect we will never see <0x10 in our uses (they are probbaly burnt into the ROMs of PPC machines) but of it is easy enough to so we might as well I guess? I forgot that there is another issue, the ePAR describes the name has node-name@unit-address. The name field will contains node-name and not the full node name. Lets say Xen only uses the field name (ie node-name) to create the FDT node name. We Linux will create the procfs for the device tree (/proc/devicetree), it's possible to have numerous warning because there is 2 nodes with the same name. The alternative would be an explicit check for versions we know we understand. -- Julien Grall _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |