On Mon, 16 Sep 2019 at 22:48, Simon Glass <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Thu, 5 Sep 2019 at 02:49, <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > From: Matthias Brugger <[email protected]> > > > > The commit "libfdt: fdt_address_cells() and fdt_size_cells()" introduced > > a bug as it consolidated code between the helpers for getting > > be 0, and is frequently found so in practice for /cpus. IEEE1275 only > > requires implementations to handle 1..4 for #address-cells, although one > > could make a case for #address-cells == #size-cells == 0 being used to > > represent a bridge with a single port. > > > > While we're there, it's not totally obvious that the existing implicit > > cast of a u32 to int will give the correct results according to strict C, > > although it does work in practice. Straighten that up to cast only after > > we've made our range checks. > > > > This is based on upstream commit: > > b8d6eca ("libfdt: Allow #size-cells of 0") > > but misses the test cases,as we don't implement them in U-Boot. > > > > Signed-off-by: Matthias Brugger <[email protected]> > > --- > > > > scripts/dtc/libfdt/fdt_addresses.c | 8 +++++--- > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > This is v2 but I don't see a change log?
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> (please use patman if you can next time) _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list [email protected] https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
