On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 14:28 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>
> Do you plan to respin the OF parts at least soon? There's another
> problem Guenter found that of_fdt_unflatten_tree is not re-entrant due
> to "depth" being static and this series fixes that. So I'd rather
> apply this and avoid adding a
On 12/06/2015 03:54 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 14:28 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
Do you plan to respin the OF parts at least soon? There's another
problem Guenter found that of_fdt_unflatten_tree is not re-entrant due
to "depth" being static and this series fixes
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 8:21 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 12/06/2015 03:54 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 14:28 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you plan to respin the OF parts at least soon? There's another
>>> problem Guenter found that
On 12/06/2015 06:33 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 8:21 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
On 12/06/2015 03:54 PM, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Sun, 2015-12-06 at 14:28 -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
Do you plan to respin the OF parts at least soon? There's another
+Guenter
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Gavin Shan wrote:
> In current implementation, unflatten_dt_node() is called recursively
> to unflatten device nodes in FDT blob. It's stress to limited stack
> capacity.
>
> This avoids calling the function recursively, meaning
On 12/06/2015 12:28 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
+Guenter
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Gavin Shan wrote:
In current implementation, unflatten_dt_node() is called recursively
to unflatten device nodes in FDT blob. It's stress to limited stack
capacity.
This avoids
On Thu, Nov 05, 2015 at 10:23:15AM +1100, Gavin Shan wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:07:50AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>>On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Gavin Shan wrote:
>>> In current implementation, unflatten_dt_node() is called recursively
>>> to unflatten device
On Wed, Nov 04, 2015 at 10:07:50AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Gavin Shan wrote:
>> In current implementation, unflatten_dt_node() is called recursively
>> to unflatten device nodes in FDT blob. It's stress to limited stack
>> capacity.
>
In current implementation, unflatten_dt_node() is called recursively
to unflatten device nodes in FDT blob. It's stress to limited stack
capacity.
This avoids calling the function recursively, meaning the device
nodes are unflattened in one call on unflatten_dt_node(): two arrays
are introduced
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 7:12 AM, Gavin Shan wrote:
> In current implementation, unflatten_dt_node() is called recursively
> to unflatten device nodes in FDT blob. It's stress to limited stack
> capacity.
Did you actually hit a problem?
Now we have a max depth of 64.
10 matches
Mail list logo