Hi Madhukar,

Before we merge this change, can you please explain how we arrived at this specific version? Are we tracking the stable version of the library?

What would be the testing criteria before merging the library? Does tftf provide any tests that can act as a smoking gun?

Does it make sense to ask platform owners to test the specific version you plan to merge? This way we would have more confidence in the library.

-Varun

From: TF-A <tf-a-bounces@lists.trustedfirmware.org> On Behalf Of Madhukar Pappireddy via TF-A
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 4:48 PM
To: tf-a@lists.trustedfirmware.org
Subject: [TF-A] Upgrading libfdt library

External email: Use caution opening links or attachments

Hello,

I am planning to upgrade libfdt library source files in TF-A. They haven’t been updated for a while. As the project moves towards improving the fconf framework and adding more properties in device tree source files, we rely more on libfdt APIs. I have done some preliminary investigation to check if there is any performance penalty in upgrading the libfdt source files integrated into TF-A  from the current version(which corresponds to commit aadd0b6 in the dtc repo [1]) to master commit (85e5d83). I have run some basics tests on both x86 and aarch64 machines and I have not seen any performance degradation. I plan to push a patch shortly to integrate the latest version of libfdt files in TF-A.

Please let me know if you are aware of any performance issues or have other concerns.

[1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/utils/dtc/dtc.git

Thanks,

Madhu