Hi Roman, On Mon, 28 Aug 2023 at 02:00, Roman Azarenko <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2023-08-25 at 12:06 -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > @@ -564,9 +564,13 @@ static int fit_extract_data(struct > > > image_tool_params *params, const char *fname) > > > /* Pack the FDT and place the data after it */ > > > fdt_pack(fdt); > > > > > > - new_size = fdt_totalsize(fdt); > > > - new_size = ALIGN(new_size, align_size); > > > + unpadded_size = fdt_totalsize(fdt); > > > + new_size = ALIGN(unpadded_size, align_size); > > > fdt_set_totalsize(fdt, new_size); > > > > I didn't know that was allowed...I thought it needed fdt_open_into() ? > > The introduction of fdt_set_totalsize() comes from commit ebfe611be91e > ("mkimage: fit_image: Add option to make fit header align"). The commit > message doesn't describe the choice of this function vs fdt_open_into(). > > Personally I'm unable to definitively comment on it. I can only blindly > guess, that because we're only changing the total length of the fdt > struct, and keeping all other fields the same, we don't need to allocate > a new fdt struct with a different size.
I am not sure if it would cause problems. I do understand that you didn't write the code. You could copy the people who did (and those that reviewed it) for their input. But I think it should change to call fdt_open_into()...if you look at that function it does extra things. Unfortunately, the function has no comment in libfdt.h. Could you add another patch before or after this one? Regards, Simon
