From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0582AC433E6 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 08:39:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0E8664E36 for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 08:39:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229558AbhBAIjP (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Feb 2021 03:39:15 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37512 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232285AbhBAIjG (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Feb 2021 03:39:06 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x62e.google.com (mail-ej1-x62e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 65FA9C0613ED for ; Mon, 1 Feb 2021 00:38:05 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x62e.google.com with SMTP id b9so3414881ejy.12 for ; Mon, 01 Feb 2021 00:38:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bgdev-pl.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=z4AuE6zxjnO1SI9ppd5bfchNPmK3baNkX/gyPe+l0t8=; b=kCyNznqU+jdacM7Tug3g2mt986OIGwhThXmFdCnBI5qvL7bKM0q4Ue4w33dvry2Nfg BXAOVMrP8rpJ8JjScqAN/7PBO8mvhyP0pBwMr/d+fupexWDNqfFcZvC8GI/yRY8dV++t rU1epvmkKxi3+FCTCONM/tSZE8Z85GGn6xwDdwvdAEX+uB5Del88TU5AolPYq6bZlD6i /irA7W60+faSJVy3yuvhPdkFqBkmr2g/k/Mv1R2PhlBAWIfMWzRLle196mjwzbztwmpU Wx2k4ajd+LAFv7YufsWTAdDV4ywpoS4iqi6G2Kwxv0F1orO3G9NJZLBB+zj+nu3MlOBK K1jQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=z4AuE6zxjnO1SI9ppd5bfchNPmK3baNkX/gyPe+l0t8=; b=HkDlX9/rpFXVQOuRZwfnwpUmdwmCQ/HxdNt7fBKgj9E/MkXK+ZSOCWTT5qWAIS0XiP +V5XsSm0B24PDA4geyd3HuFh5hDxwykk8OMNjZ3BuYD3bGhXuFozCGmyEAZ2EsO8Rg0v bvNDRyFNdgBpjTZHyr6m5jP4nXVkJER8XWLZx/vL/9WsyfAj+TQ4KFl/hHa9sm6YEsrn LNrYL7csbynE7/vsLZuyKWlSo8Fu+sD/93eN5fvc1NjCW9AT5F/sBUETPYHx3prH5+sF J3HjHaA7TFlM0OJcTvTVvwxFb8kzHpLXuz5L8FgPOaD972o33d2TxC+2vSor7uMgfiYn Eg3Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531o+Yey8R/u7ttkPcalIdsYnhkfDooWN96oFMUKGCMtnCnR+x8+ q5K8l8RG3990ImF/w1z4sn3RML0eCksmFncM86wJQA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw7iZgXyHCD35LZFETL5VROJDAs+q4uynErDBWz1W4mY47jjlfbaQN0o2fztKMogr1ympEDX0yMLs5fnR2rmu0= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4707:: with SMTP id y7mr4854532ejq.445.1612168684094; Mon, 01 Feb 2021 00:38:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210129134624.9247-1-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20210129134624.9247-9-brgl@bgdev.pl> <20210131004308.GA4687@sol> In-Reply-To: <20210131004308.GA4687@sol> From: Bartosz Golaszewski Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2021 09:37:53 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] gpio: sim: new testing module To: Kent Gibson Cc: Andy Shevchenko , Linus Walleij , Joel Becker , Christoph Hellwig , Jonathan Corbet , =?UTF-8?Q?Uwe_Kleine=2DK=C3=B6nig?= , Geert Uytterhoeven , "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" , linux-doc , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Bartosz Golaszewski Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jan 31, 2021 at 1:43 AM Kent Gibson wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 09:37:55PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 4:57 PM Andy Shevchenko > > wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 02:46:24PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote: > > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski > > > ... > > > > > [snip] > > > > Honestly, I don't like the idea of Yet Another (custom) Parser in the kernel. > > > > > > Have you investigated existing parsers? We have cmdline.c, gpio-aggregator.c, > > > etc. Besides the fact of test cases which are absent here. And who knows what > > > we allow to be entered. > > > > > > > Yes, I looked all around the kernel to find something I could reuse > > but failed to find anything useful for this particular purpose. If you > > have something you could point me towards, I'm open to alternatives. > > > > Once we agree on the form of the module, I'll port self-tests to using > > it instead of gpio-mockup, so we'll have some tests in the tree. > > > > Given the existing selftests focus on testing the gpio-mockup itself, it > would be more appropriate that you add separate tests for gpio-sim. > > As an end user I'm interested in the concrete example of driving gpio-sim > that selftests would provide, so I'm looking forward to seeing that. > > Cheers, > Kent. Makes sense, I'll add tests in v2. Bartosz