On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:09:06AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote: > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 11:39:59AM -0300, Fabio Estevam wrote: > > Then for the next cycle, we should plan on adding this > > fdt_increase_size() into the common fdt_status_disabled(). > > I'm a little leary of generic changes here having an unexpected size / > performance impact. The API specifically does not "just" handle this > case like it does for some others. We should update the docs around > fdt_set_node_status and fdt_status_disabled to reference the return > codes of fdt_setprop_string itself and check for anyone else that hasn't > been considering this possible failure case.
Maybe we can just add a new additional small wrapper that does the fdt_increase_size() if required? This is a generic need, not something every board should implement on its own. Francesco
