[OpenBIOS] Fwd: Re: [PATCH] next-property

[Olivier Danet]

On 03/02/2014 23:12, Olivier Danet wrote:
> On 03/02/2014 15:21, Artyom Tarasenko wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 9:54 PM, Olivier Danet <odanet at caramail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> obp_nextprop(node,name) calls the Forth word "next-property" then
>>> pops the
>>> result. "next-property" should therefore always return something :
>>>   * A string when the property provided is not the last one of the
>>> node.
>>>   * Zero when the property provided is the last one of the node.
>>>   * Zero when the property provided does not exist in the current node.
>>>
>>> Previously, next-property returned nothing when the property didn't
>>> exist.
>>>
>>> "next-property" behavior with last and nonexistant properties differs
>>> between implementations of OF.
>> Right. As discussed before, the current behavior matches the OBP
>> behavior on
>> sun4u machines.
>>
>> It would be nice to keep the comatibility with OBP. Can the C function
>> obp_nextprop(node,name) be modified instead?
>>
>> Artyom
>>
>>> This problem was found with NetBSD on Sparc32. It ennumerates
>>> peripherals
>>> when starting X11 and asks for the "name" and "device_type" property
>>> of many
>>> nodes, including some which have neither "name" nor "device_type"
>>> properties.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Olivier Danet <odanet at caramail.com>
>>> ===================================================================
>>> --- forth/device/property.fs    (révision 1257)
>>> +++ forth/device/property.fs    (copie de travail)
>>> @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@
>>>       2drop r> >dn.properties @
>>>     else
>>>       r> find-property dup if @ then
>>> -    ?dup if >prop.next @ then
>>> +    dup if >prop.next @ then
>>>     then
>>>
>>>     ?dup if
>>> ===================================================================
>>>
>>> --
>>> OpenBIOS                 http://openbios.org/
>>> Mailinglist:  http://lists.openbios.org/mailman/listinfo
>>> Free your System - May the Forth be with you
>>
>>
>
> OpenBIOS's current behavior does not match any other !
>
> For "next-property" we have 3 cases :
>    a) The property is not the last
>    b) The property is the last
>    c) The property does not exist
>
> Current OpenBIOS : a) -1 "string"    b) 0        c) nothing
> Standard         : a) true "string"  b) false    c) false
> Sun Ultra10      : a) -1 "string"    b) nothing  c) nothing
> PowerPC iBook    : a) -1 "string"    b) -1 0 0   c) 0
> Previous patch   : a) -1 "string"    b) 0        c) 0
>
> Here is a patch adhering to the Ultra10's behavior, maybe other
> Sun4u computers do differently :
>
> ===================================================================
> --- arch/sparc32/romvec.c    (révision 1257)
> +++ arch/sparc32/romvec.c    (copie de travail)
> @@ -173,8 +173,9 @@
>
>  const char *obp_nextprop(int node, const char *name)
>  {
> -    int found;
> +    int stackcnt;
>
> +    stackcnt = dstackcnt;
>      if (!name || *name == '\0') {
>          // NULL name means get first property
>          push_str("");
> @@ -184,14 +185,13 @@
>      }
>      PUSH(node);
>      fword("next-property");
> -    found = POP();
> -    if (!found) {
> +    if (dstackcnt == stackcnt) {
>          DPRINTF("obp_nextprop(0x%x, %s) (not found)\n", node, name);
>
>          return "";
>      } else {
>          char *str;
> -
> +        POP(); /* true */
>          POP(); /* len */
>          str = (char *) POP();
>
> ===================================================================
> --- forth/device/property.fs    (révision 1257)
> +++ forth/device/property.fs    (copie de travail)
> @@ -70,14 +70,12 @@
>      2drop r> >dn.properties @
>    else
>      r> find-property dup if @ then
> -    ?dup if >prop.next @ then
> +    dup if >prop.next @ then
>    then
>
>    ?dup if
>      >prop.name @ dup cstrlen true
>      ( phandle name-str name-len true )
> -  else
> -    false
>    then
>  ;
>
> ===================================================================
>
> The 'standard' way makes next-property more useable as
> a Forth word, but, really, I don't care.
>
> Olivier
>
>

Oh, sorry, please forget this patch.

It breaks things elsewhere (".properties" ...)