Hi, On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 10:46 AM Masami Hiramatsu <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, 5 Sep 2026 23:16:36 +0900 > Sang-Heon Jeon <[email protected]> wrote: > > > xbc_verify_tree() checks that every node's next and child are below > > xbc_node_num. Both fields store the index of an existing node, which > > is below xbc_node_num. > > This is a kind of foolpoof/defensive checking. (so I call it verify.) > > > > > So remove the checks. > > > > No functional change. > > Hmm, OK, I think we should decouple the logic/implementation > verification from runtime verification (e.g. wrong format) > and move the former to tools/bootconfig. > > Thank you,
Thanks for the review, Masami. To make sure I understand, you mean moving the foolproof check after xbc_init() in tools/bootconfig? > > > > Signed-off-by: Sang-Heon Jeon <[email protected]> > > --- > > lib/bootconfig.c | 13 +------------ > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 12 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/bootconfig.c b/lib/bootconfig.c > > index 89c88e359179..d383430637ee 100644 > > --- a/lib/bootconfig.c > > +++ b/lib/bootconfig.c > > @@ -1005,7 +1005,7 @@ static int __init xbc_close_brace(char **k, char *n) > > > > static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void) > > { > > - int i, depth; > > + int depth; > > size_t len, wlen; > > struct xbc_node *n, *m; > > > > @@ -1022,17 +1022,6 @@ static int __init xbc_verify_tree(void) > > return -ENOENT; > > } > > > > - for (i = 0; i < xbc_node_num; i++) { > > - if (xbc_nodes[i].next >= xbc_node_num) { > > - return xbc_parse_error("No closing brace", > > - xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i)); > > - } > > - if (xbc_nodes[i].child >= xbc_node_num) { > > - return xbc_parse_error("Broken child node", > > - xbc_node_get_data(xbc_nodes + i)); > > - } > > - } > > - > > /* Key tree limitation check */ > > n = &xbc_nodes[0]; > > depth = 1; > > -- > > 2.43.0 > > > > > -- > Masami Hiramatsu (Google) <[email protected]> Best regards, Sang-Heon Jeon
