On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 04:01:38PM -0800, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 01/29/18 06:42, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 8:53 PM, <frowand.l...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> From: Frank Rowand <frank.row...@sony.com> > >> > >> Move duplicating and unflattening of an overlay flattened devicetree > >> (FDT) into the overlay application code. To accomplish this, > >> of_overlay_apply() is replaced by of_overlay_fdt_apply(). > >> > >> The copy of the FDT (aka "duplicate FDT") now belongs to devicetree > >> code, which is thus responsible for freeing the duplicate FDT. The > >> caller of of_overlay_fdt_apply() remains responsible for freeing the > >> original FDT. > >> > >> The unflattened device tree (aka expanded device tree, EDT) now > > > > Not really a fan of a new acronym. > > > >> belongs to devicetree code, which is thus responsible for freeing > >> the EDT. > >> > >> These ownership changes prevent early freeing of the duplicated FDT > >> or the EDT, which could result in use after free errors. > >> > >> of_overlay_fdt_apply() is a private function for the anticipated > >> overlay loader. > >> > >> Update unittest.c to use of_overlay_fdt_apply() instead of > >> of_overlay_apply(). > >> > >> Move overlay fragments from artificial locations in > >> drivers/of/unittest-data/tests-overlay.dtsi into one devicetree > >> source file per overlay. This led to changes in > >> drivers/of/unitest-data/Makefile and drivers/of/unitest.c. > > I should have reversed the cause and effect in that sentence to > instead be: > > The changes to drivers/of/unittest.c require the test overlays > to be in FDT form instead of unflattened devicetree form. Move > overlay fragments from artificial locations in > drivers/of/unittest-data/tests-overlay.dtsi into one > devicetree source file per overlay and thus create > one FDT per overlay. > > > > Why the rearranging? That should be a separate patch. > Bisectability. > > I can make the changes to the devicetree files in a second patch. > After the first patch, there will be 29 self test fails. > > I will make the change unless you respond back to this saying not to.
One patch is fine for me. Unit test is special. Rob