> Just to be sure, we're talking here about making sure the value stored > in the DT is not bigger than the specified value (here an u8)? If so, > that isn't the reason why I'm suggesting those two patches. > > Without /bits 8/ in the DT property, whatever were the values I put in > the property, I'd always get a 0. So I need to fix it either in the DT > (but Rob does not really like it) or in the driver. Hi Quentin Ah, you are fixing endian issues. That was not clear to me from the commit message. I don't know enough about how DT stores values in the blob. Is there type info? Can the DT core tell if a value in the blob is a u8 or a u32? It would be nice if it warned about reading a u8 from a u32 blob. Anyway, this change still removes some bounds checking. Are they important? Do they need to be added back? Thanks Andrew
