On 8/11/25 10:50 AM, Philip Oberfichtner wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 05:24:21PM -0600, Tom Rini wrote:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2025 at 01:15:45AM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 8/7/25 10:11 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 09:41:34PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 8/7/25 6:21 PM, Tom Rini wrote:
On Thu, Aug 07, 2025 at 03:41:38PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote:
On 8/7/25 12:24 PM, Philip Oberfichtner wrote:
CONFIG_HAS_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT is obsolete, if we interpret the value
"zero" as "unlimited".
This sentence makes no sense. Is the variable not obsolete if its value is
non-zero ?
This is phrased oddly, yes. How about:
By making the code treat a size limit of 0 as unlimited we no longer
need to guard asking about having a size limit on the platform.
0 shouldn't mean unlimited, that is just fragile ...
That's a standard unix thing? ulimit -c 0 is unlimited.
This is a really bad argument, because then the counter-argument is, that
size = 0 is also a valid size and it shouldn't be conflated with SIZE_LIMIT
validity.
My take on this is, don't conflate size-limit "enabled/disabled" with
size-limit "value" , these are two separate config options. Mixing them is
not helping.
I still think it's fine, but it's not worth arguing further over, and we
can just make sure to gate all of the symbols rather than 0-is-disabled.
The idea of treating a size limit of zero as unlimited has been common
practice in mainline U-Boot since 2019, where CONFIG_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT has
been introduced. The same logic has later been applied to TPL and VPL
size limits.
That still does not make it the correct approach.
If we want to consistently stick to the HAS_*_SIZE_LIMIT approach, we'd
have to introduce four extra Kconfig options alongside
HAS_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT:
CONFIG_HAS_UBOOT_WITH_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT
What does this one do ?
CONFIG_HAS_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT
CONFIG_HAS_TPL_SIZE_LIMIT
CONFIG_HAS_VPL_SIZE_LIMIT
This is fine by me.
Furthermore, the extra lines of code in the toplevel Makefile, which
could otherwise be removed:
ifneq ($(CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT),)
BOARD_SIZE_CHECK= @ $(call size_check,$@,$(CONFIG_BOARD_SIZE_LIMIT))
else
BOARD_SIZE_CHECK =
endif
ifneq ($(CONFIG_HAS_UBOOT_WITH_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT),0x0)
UBOOT_WITH_SPL_SIZE_CHECK = @$(call
size_check,$@,$(CONFIG_UBOOT_WITH_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT)
else
UBOOT_WITH_SPL_SIZE_CHECK =
endif
ifneq ($(CONFIG_SPL_SIZE_LIMIT),0x0)
SPL_SIZE_CHECK = @$(call size_check,$@,$$(tools/spl_size_limit))
else
SPL_SIZE_CHECK =
endif
ifneq ($(CONFIG_TPL_SIZE_LIMIT),0x0)
TPL_SIZE_CHECK = @$(call size_check,$@,$(CONFIG_TPL_SIZE_LIMIT))
else
TPL_SIZE_CHECK =
endif
ifneq ($(CONFIG_VPL_SIZE_LIMIT),0x0)
VPL_SIZE_CHECK = @$(call size_check,$@,$(CONFIG_VPL_SIZE_LIMIT))
else
VPL_SIZE_CHECK =
endif
This code is already in the U-Boot Makefile .
Maybe tools/spl_size_limit.c could be somehow extended to deduplicate
the above ?
Is it really worth adding this much of extra code?
Yes, because 0 does not mean unlimited .
