Re: [PATCH v3 06/15] Introduce structured tag value definition

[Herve Codina]

Hi David,

On Thu, 10 Sep 2026 19:41:42 +1000
David Gibson <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

...
> > > > +/* Tests reserved tags */
> > > > +#define FDT_TEST_NONE_CAN_SKIP		FDT_TAG_CAN_SKIP(FDT_TAG_DATA_NONE, 0)
> > > > +#define FDT_TEST_1CELL_CAN_SKIP		FDT_TAG_CAN_SKIP(FDT_TAG_DATA_1CELL, 0)
> > > > +#define FDT_TEST_2CELLS_CAN_SKIP	FDT_TAG_CAN_SKIP(FDT_TAG_DATA_2CELLS, 0)
> > > > +#define FDT_TEST_VARLEN_CAN_SKIP	FDT_TAG_CAN_SKIP(FDT_TAG_DATA_VARLEN, 0)
> > > > +#define FDT_TEST_NONE_NO_SKIP		FDT_TAG_NO_SKIP(FDT_TAG_DATA_NONE, 0)    
> > > 
...

> > 
> > /*
> >  * Tests reserved tags
> >  *
> >  * A TAG_ID range in "structured tags" is reserved to tests tags.
> >  * This tests reserved range is from tag_id 0 to tag_id 0x100.
> >  *
> >  * When those tags are encountered they should be considered as "unknown"
> >  * tags and rules related to "unknown" tags must be followed.
> >  *
> >  * Readers should skip them or fail depending on the SKIP_SAFE flag. Writers
> >  * should never use those tags. Their usage is only acceptable in test cases.
> >  */
> > 
> > Is it ok?  
> 
> I'd probably put the reserved range up high somewhere rather than
> starting at 0.  Otherwise it looks good.
> 
> 

Ok I will move the reserved range at an higher area and probable the
highest possible area.

Will choose also the highest possible value for FDT_TEST_NONE_NO_SKIP
Indeed, this one is a non-skippable tag and so should use "old style"
tag.

Best regards.
Hervé