On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 10:30:51AM +0000, Peter Maydell wrote: > On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 at 10:11, P J P <ppan...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > +-- On Fri, 22 Mar 2019, Peter Maydell wrote --+ > > | This document is specific to aarch64, but the part of > > | QEMU's device tree code being modified here is > > | architecture independent. > > | > > | Cc'ing David Gibson who will probably know if there is > > | an architecture-independent limit on DTB size we should > > | be enforcing, or whether we are better just to have a check > > | that avoids the overflow. > > > > Thank you for CC'ing David. It seems Agraf did not receive email @suse.de. > > Yes, Alex's email has changed (I've updated the cc list). > > > Current limit defined by FDT_MAX_SIZE is ~1MB. > > But currently this is only used when creating a DT from scratch.
Right, and AFAIK the only reason we have a fixed buffer size for that
is because it avoids having to mess around with reallocation if we hit
an -FDT_ERR_NOSPACE during creation.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
