On Mon, 1 Apr 2019 at 03:46, Eugeniu Rosca <[email protected]> wrote: > > The 'no_fdt' goto label was introduced by v2015.01 commit [0] and it > had two review stages [1-2]. The *documented* purpose behind commit [0] > is (excerpt from commit description): > > > allows both FDT and non-FDT kernels to boot by making the > > third parameter to the bootm/bootz optional > > While [1] and [2] share the same goal, they have very different > implementations: > - [1] was based on a very simple 'argc' check at function error out > with returning success to the caller if the third parameter was NOT > passed to bootm/bootz command. This approach had the downside of > returning success to the caller even in case of legitimate internal > errors, which should halt booting. > - [2] added the "no_fdt" label and several "goto no_fdt" statements. > This allowed to report the legitimate internal errors to the caller. > > IOW the major difference between [1] and [2] is: > - [1] boot w/o FDT if FDT address is not passed to boot{m,z,*} > - [2] give *freedom* to the developer to boot w/o FDT from any > (more or less) arbitrary point in the function flow (and here > comes the peculiar aspect, which looks to be a leftover from [1]) > with the precondition that the 3rd argument (FDT address) is NOT > provided to boot{m,z,*}. In practice, this means that only a subset > of "goto no_fdt" end up booting w/o FDT while the other subset is > returning an error to the caller. > > This patch removes the peculiar behavior described above, such that > "goto no_fdt" performs really what it tells to the developer. > > The motivation of this patch is to decrease the unneeded complexity > and increase the readability of boot_get_fdt(). > > [0] 48aead71c1ad ("fdt: Allow non-FDT kernels to boot when CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT > is defined") > [1] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/412923/ > ("[U-Boot,v1] fdt: Allow non-FDT kernels to boot when CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT is > defined") > [2] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/415635/ > ("[U-Boot,v2] fdt: Allow non-FDT kernels to boot when CONFIG_OF_LIBFDT is > defined") > > Signed-off-by: Eugeniu Rosca <[email protected]> > --- > Changes in v2: > - NA > - Link v1: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1071587/ > --- > common/image-fdt.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> Can we create a test of the boot_get_fdt() behaviour? We have test_fit and test_vboot as possible examples, although perhaps a test that directly calls this function would be better? Regards, Simon > diff --git a/common/image-fdt.c b/common/image-fdt.c > index 1817ce6bce30..c335e7e2f220 100644 > --- a/common/image-fdt.c > +++ b/common/image-fdt.c > @@ -489,7 +489,7 @@ int boot_get_fdt(int flag, int argc, char * const argv[], > uint8_t arch, > no_fdt: > ok_no_fdt = 1; > error: > - if (!select && ok_no_fdt) { > + if (ok_no_fdt) { > debug("Continuing to boot without FDT\n"); > return 0; > } > -- > 2.21.0 > _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
