On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 11:02:29AM -0700, Frank Rowand wrote:

On 10/04/18 22:06, AKASHI, Takahiro wrote:

[snip]

quoted

quoted

quoted

quoted

+int fdt_setprop_reg(void *fdt, int nodeoffset, const char *name,
+                                               u64 addr, u64 size)
+{
+       int addr_cells, size_cells;

unsigned

fdt_[address|size]_cell() returns an int.

I stand corrected.  They take advantage of the fact that valid values
are in the range 0..4 and return a negative value for error.

I'm not sure if the spec formally defines that these values will fit
in a positive 'int'.  But if addresses are 8GiB each, you're going to
have much bigger problems putting it in a device tree than this
function.

-- 
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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20181010/6840e7e7/attachment.sig>