[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20241210104141.39acffb1@bootlin.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2024 10:41:41 +0100
From: Herve Codina <herve.codina@...tlin.com>
To: Ayush Singh <ayush@...gleboard.org>
Cc: Andrew Davis <afd@...com>, Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Greg
Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Saravana Kannan
<saravanak@...gle.com>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Luca Ceresoli <luca.ceresoli@...tlin.com>,
Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] of: overlay: Add support for export-symbols node
feature
Hi Ayush,
On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 14:52:22 +0530
Ayush Singh <ayush@...gleboard.org> wrote:
...
>
> What is the reason for not using symbols directly as described here [3]?
>
> I do like this approach since it does not pollute the global symbols.
> Just want to know if there are any other reasons for it.
>
Modifying the __symbols__ node at runtime (adding / removing properties in
it) exposes memory leaks if __symbols__ already exist in the live DT.
This __symbols__ node exist if the dtb was compiled with '-@' or if you
chain the overlay (i.e. __symbols__ node created by the first overlay).
I think also that some conflicts can appears. What happens if you want to
add a new label but this label is already present for some other purpose?
Best regards,
Hervé
Powered by blists - more mailing lists