On Sun, Nov 16, 2025 at 12:23:30AM +0100, Marek Vasut wrote: > On 11/13/25 7:49 PM, Tom Rini wrote: > > Hello Tom, > > > > CI does show that no boards went oversize . If there is some growth on > > > existing devices, maybe we can shrink that, but maintaining obsolete DTC > > > code base going forward and picking random updates into it, that will only > > > lead to increasing maintenance pain, so I don't want to do that. > > > > Yeah, it's not an easy spot. But I'm really not happy with growing main > > U-Boot almost everywhere by 2KiB - 4KiB, and SPL by ~512 bytes or more > > just to keep up. I do see that integratorcp_cm1136 barely grows at all, > > so maybe there's something that can be done more widely and just wasn't > > clear at first. m68k only grows an average of 500 bytes and MIPS is > > ~1KiB. PowerPC grows a lot. RISC-V a little. > I suspect this might have to do with DTO support. The imx8mp_dhcom do use > DTOs and the fdt_overlay.c code grew a lot. > > I also found out that if I patch out can_assume() and replace it with plain > 1 , then the size drops by 1-2 kiB, but that's probably not what we want to > do.
I'm not sure, maybe we do? Or maybe we need to look and have *one* place that confirms correct alignment and either fixes/complains, and then every follow-up location doesn't need to perform that (or possibly many other as well) validation checks. My impression from when I looked at the code last, a few year ago, was that it was designed with "validate with most? every? function" and we would be happy enough with "validate once". -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
