* [PATCH 0/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays @ 2017-04-24 5:43 frowand.list 2017-04-24 5:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] of: add support of dtc compiler flags for device tree overlays frowand.list 2017-04-24 5:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays frowand.list 0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: frowand.list @ 2017-04-24 5:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring, stephen.boyd, Michal Marek Cc: devicetree, linux-kernel, linux-kbuild From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> Existing overlay unit tests examine individual pieces of the overlay code. The new tests target the entire process of applying an overlay. Frank Rowand (2): of: add support of dtc compiler flags for device tree overlays of: Add unit tests for applying overlays. drivers/of/fdt.c | 45 +++++ drivers/of/of_private.h | 2 + drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile | 17 +- drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts | 53 ++++++ drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts | 20 +++ drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts | 71 ++++++++ drivers/of/unittest.c | 264 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ scripts/Makefile.lib | 2 + 8 files changed, 471 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts -- Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/2] of: add support of dtc compiler flags for device tree overlays 2017-04-24 5:43 [PATCH 0/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays frowand.list @ 2017-04-24 5:43 ` frowand.list 2017-04-24 5:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays frowand.list 1 sibling, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: frowand.list @ 2017-04-24 5:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring, stephen.boyd, Michal Marek Cc: devicetree, linux-kernel, linux-kbuild From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> The dtc compiler version that adds initial support was available in 4.11-rc1. Add the ability to set the dtc compiler flags needed by overlays. Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> --- scripts/Makefile.lib | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.lib b/scripts/Makefile.lib index 0a07f9014944..0bbec480d323 100644 --- a/scripts/Makefile.lib +++ b/scripts/Makefile.lib @@ -283,6 +283,8 @@ ifeq ($(KBUILD_ENABLE_EXTRA_GCC_CHECKS),) DTC_FLAGS += -Wno-unit_address_vs_reg endif +DTC_FLAGS += $(DTC_FLAGS_$(basetarget)) + # Generate an assembly file to wrap the output of the device tree compiler quiet_cmd_dt_S_dtb= DTB $@ cmd_dt_S_dtb= \ -- Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays. 2017-04-24 5:43 [PATCH 0/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays frowand.list 2017-04-24 5:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] of: add support of dtc compiler flags for device tree overlays frowand.list @ 2017-04-24 5:43 ` frowand.list 2017-04-24 17:16 ` Rob Herring 1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: frowand.list @ 2017-04-24 5:43 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring, stephen.boyd, Michal Marek Cc: devicetree, linux-kernel, linux-kbuild From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> Existing overlay unit tests examine individual pieces of the overlay code. The new tests target the entire process of applying an overlay. Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> --- There are checkpatch warnings. I have reviewed them and feel they can be ignored. drivers/of/fdt.c | 45 +++++ drivers/of/of_private.h | 2 + drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile | 17 +- drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts | 53 ++++++ drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts | 20 +++ drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts | 71 ++++++++ drivers/of/unittest.c | 264 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 7 files changed, 469 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts diff --git a/drivers/of/fdt.c b/drivers/of/fdt.c index e5ce4b59e162..54120ab8f322 100644 --- a/drivers/of/fdt.c +++ b/drivers/of/fdt.c @@ -31,6 +31,8 @@ #include <asm/setup.h> /* for COMMAND_LINE_SIZE */ #include <asm/page.h> +#include "of_private.h" + /* * of_fdt_limit_memory - limit the number of regions in the /memory node * @limit: maximum entries @@ -1256,11 +1258,54 @@ bool __init early_init_dt_scan(void *params) */ void __init unflatten_device_tree(void) { +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_UNITTEST + extern uint8_t __dtb_ot_base_begin[]; + extern uint8_t __dtb_ot_base_end[]; + struct device_node *ot_base_root; + void *ot_base; + u32 data_size; + u32 size; +#endif + __unflatten_device_tree(initial_boot_params, NULL, &of_root, early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch, false); /* Get pointer to "/chosen" and "/aliases" nodes for use everywhere */ of_alias_scan(early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch); + +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_UNITTEST + /* + * Base device tree for the overlay unittest. + * Do as much as possible the same way as done for the normal FDT. + * Have to stop before resolving phandles, because that uses kmalloc. + */ + + data_size = __dtb_ot_base_end - __dtb_ot_base_begin; + if (!data_size) { + pr_err("No __dtb_ot_base_begin to attach\n"); + return; + } + + size = fdt_totalsize(__dtb_ot_base_begin); + if (size != data_size) { + pr_err("__dtb_ot_base_begin header totalsize != actual size"); + return; + } + + ot_base = early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch(size, + roundup_pow_of_two(FDT_V17_SIZE)); + if (!ot_base) { + pr_err("alloc of ot_base failed"); + return; + } + + memcpy(ot_base, __dtb_ot_base_begin, size); + + __unflatten_device_tree(ot_base, NULL, &ot_base_root, + early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch, true); + + unittest_set_ot_base_root(ot_base_root); +#endif } /** diff --git a/drivers/of/of_private.h b/drivers/of/of_private.h index f4f6793d2f04..02d54da078ac 100644 --- a/drivers/of/of_private.h +++ b/drivers/of/of_private.h @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ static inline int of_property_notify(int action, struct device_node *np, } #endif /* CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC */ +extern void unittest_set_ot_base_root(struct device_node *dn); + /** * General utilities for working with live trees. * diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile b/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile index 1ac5cc01d627..6879befe29d2 100644 --- a/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile @@ -1,7 +1,18 @@ obj-y += testcases.dtb.o +obj-y += ot.dtb.o +obj-y += ot_bad_phandle.dtb.o +obj-y += ot_base.dtb.o targets += testcases.dtb testcases.dtb.S +targets += ot.dtb ot.dtb.S +targets += ot_bad_phandle.dtb ot_bad_phandle.dtb.S +targets += ot_base.dtb ot_base.dtb.S -.SECONDARY: \ - $(obj)/testcases.dtb.S \ - $(obj)/testcases.dtb +.PRECIOUS: \ + $(obj)/%.dtb.S \ + $(obj)/%.dtb + +# enable creation of __symbols__ node +DTC_FLAGS_ot := -@ +DTC_FLAGS_ot_base := -@ +DTC_FLAGS_ot_bad_phandle := -@ diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..37e105622b7a --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ +/dts-v1/; +/plugin/; + +/ { + + fragment@0 { + target = <&electric_1>; + + __overlay__ { + status = "ok"; + + hvac_2: hvac_large_1 { + compatible = "ot,hvac-large"; + heat-range = < 40 75 >; + cool-range = < 65 80 >; + }; + }; + }; + + fragment@1 { + target = <&rides_1>; + + __overlay__ { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <1>; + status = "ok"; + + ride@200 { + compatible = "ot,ferris-wheel"; + reg = < 0x00000200 0x100 >; + hvac-provider = < &hvac_2 >; + hvac-thermostat = < 27 32 > ; + hvac-zones = < 12 5 >; + hvac-zone-names = "operator", "snack-bar"; + spin-controller = < &spin_ctrl_1 3 >; + spin-rph = < 30 >; + gondolas = < 16 >; + gondola-capacity = < 6 >; + }; + }; + }; + + fragment@2 { + target = <&lights_2>; + + __overlay__ { + status = "ok"; + color = "purple", "white", "red", "green"; + rate = < 3 256 >; + }; + }; + +}; diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..234d5f1dcfe4 --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ +/dts-v1/; +/plugin/; + +/ { + + fragment@0 { + target = <&electric_1>; + + __overlay__ { + + // This label should cause an error when the overlay + // is applied. There is already a phandle value + // in the base tree for motor_1. + spin_ctrl_1_conflict: motor_1 { + accelerate = < 3 >; + decelerate = < 5 >; + }; + }; + }; +}; diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..0a4fbe598b02 --- /dev/null +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ +/dts-v1/; +/plugin/; + +/ { + testcase-data-2 { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <1>; + + electric_1: substation@100 { + compatible = "ot,big-volts-control"; + reg = < 0x00000100 0x100 >; + status = "disabled"; + + hvac_1: hvac_medium_1 { + compatible = "ot,hvac-medium"; + heat-range = < 50 75 >; + cool-range = < 60 80 >; + }; + + spin_ctrl_1: motor_1 { + compatible = "ot,ferris-wheel-motor"; + spin = "clockwise"; + }; + + spin_ctrl_2: motor_8 { + compatible = "ot,roller-coaster-motor"; + }; + }; + + rides_1: fairway_1 { + #address-cells = <1>; + #size-cells = <1>; + compatible = "ot,rides"; + status = "disabled"; + orientation = < 127 >; + + ride@100 { + compatible = "ot,roller-coaster"; + reg = < 0x00000100 0x100 >; + hvac-provider = < &hvac_1 >; + hvac-thermostat = < 29 > ; + hvac-zones = < 14 >; + hvac-zone-names = "operator"; + spin-controller = < &spin_ctrl_2 5 &spin_ctrl_2 7 >; + spin-controller-names = "track_1", "track_2"; + queues = < 2 >; + }; + }; + + lights_1: lights@30000 { + compatible = "ot,work-lights"; + reg = < 0x00030000 0x1000 >; + status = "disabled"; + }; + + lights_2: lights@40000 { + compatible = "ot,show-lights"; + reg = < 0x00040000 0x1000 >; + status = "disabled"; + rate = < 13 138 >; + }; + + retail_1: vending@50000 { + reg = < 0x00050000 0x1000 >; + compatible = "ot,tickets"; + status = "disabled"; + }; + + }; +}; + diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest.c b/drivers/of/unittest.c index 62db55b97c10..599eb10e9b40 100644 --- a/drivers/of/unittest.c +++ b/drivers/of/unittest.c @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ #include <linux/err.h> #include <linux/errno.h> #include <linux/hashtable.h> +#include <linux/libfdt.h> #include <linux/of.h> #include <linux/of_fdt.h> #include <linux/of_irq.h> @@ -42,6 +43,13 @@ failed; \ }) +static struct device_node *ot_base_root; + +void unittest_set_ot_base_root(struct device_node *dn) +{ + ot_base_root = dn; +} + static void __init of_unittest_find_node_by_name(void) { struct device_node *np; @@ -1925,6 +1933,259 @@ static void __init of_unittest_overlay(void) static inline void __init of_unittest_overlay(void) { } #endif +#define OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(name) \ + extern uint8_t __dtb_##name##_begin[]; \ + extern uint8_t __dtb_##name##_end[] + +#define OVERLAY_INFO(name, expected) \ +{ .dtb_begin = __dtb_##name##_begin, \ + .dtb_end = __dtb_##name##_end, \ + .expected_result = expected, \ +} + +struct overlay_info { + uint8_t *dtb_begin; + uint8_t *dtb_end; + void *data; + struct device_node *np_overlay; + int expected_result; + int overlay_id; +}; + +OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(ot); +OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(ot_bad_phandle); + +struct overlay_info overlays[] = { + OVERLAY_INFO(ot, 0), + OVERLAY_INFO(ot_bad_phandle, -EINVAL), + {} +}; + +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_OVERLAY +/* + * The purpose of of_unittest_overlay_test_data_add is to add an + * overlay in the normal fashion. This is a test of the whole + * picture, instead of testing individual elements. + * + * A secondary purpose is to be able to verify that the contents of + * /proc/device-tree/ contains the updated structure and values from + * the overlay. That must be verified separately in user space. + * + * Return 0 on unexpected error. + */ +static int __init overlay_test_data_add(int onum) +{ + /* + * __dtb_ot_begin[] and __dtb_ot_end[] are + * created by cmd_dt_S_dtb in scripts/Makefile.lib + */ + struct overlay_info *info; + int k; + int ret; + u32 size; + u32 size_from_header; + + for (k = 0, info = overlays; info; info++, k++) { + if (k == onum) + break; + } + if (onum > k) + return 0; + + size = info->dtb_end - info->dtb_begin; + if (!size) { + pr_err("no overlay to attach, %d\n", onum); + ret = 0; + } + + size_from_header = fdt_totalsize(info->dtb_begin); + if (size_from_header != size) { + pr_err("overlay header totalsize != actual size, %d", onum); + return 0; + } + + /* + * Must create permanent copy of FDT because of_fdt_unflatten_tree() + * will create pointers to the passed in FDT in the EDT. + */ + info->data = kmemdup(info->dtb_begin, size, GFP_KERNEL); + if (!info->data) { + pr_err("unable to allocate memory for data, %d\n", onum); + return 0; + } + + of_fdt_unflatten_tree(info->data, NULL, &info->np_overlay); + if (!info->np_overlay) { + pr_err("unable to unflatten overlay, %d\n", onum); + ret = 0; + goto out_free_data; + } + of_node_set_flag(info->np_overlay, OF_DETACHED); + + ret = of_resolve_phandles(info->np_overlay); + if (ret) { + pr_err("resolve ot phandles (ret=%d), %d\n", ret, onum); + goto out_free_np_overlay; + } + + ret = of_overlay_create(info->np_overlay); + if (ret < 0) { + pr_err("of_overlay_create() (ret=%d), %d\n", ret, onum); + goto out_free_np_overlay; + } else { + info->overlay_id = ret; + ret = 0; + } + + pr_debug("__dtb_ot_begin applied, overlay id %d\n", ret); + + goto out; + +out_free_np_overlay: + /* + * info->np_overlay is the unflattened device tree + * It has not been spliced into the live tree. + */ + + /* todo: function to free unflattened device tree */ + +out_free_data: + kfree(info->data); + +out: + return (ret == info->expected_result); +} + +/* + * The purpose of of_unittest_overlay_high_level is to add an overlay + * in the normal fashion. This is a test of the whole picture, + * instead of individual elements. + * + * The first part of the function is _not_ normal overlay usage; it is + * finishing splicing the base overlay device tree into the live tree. + */ +static __init void of_unittest_overlay_high_level(void) +{ + struct device_node *last_sibling; + struct device_node *np; + struct device_node *of_symbols; + struct device_node *ot_base_symbols; + struct device_node **pprev; + struct property *prop; + int ret; + + if (!ot_base_root) { + unittest(0, "ot_base_root not initialized\n"); + return; + } + + /* + * Could not fixup phandles in unflatten_device_tree() because + * kmalloc() was not yet available. + */ + of_resolve_phandles(ot_base_root); + + /* + * do not allow ot_base to duplicate any node already in tree, + * this greatly simplifies the code + */ + + + /* remove ot_base_root node "__local_fixups" */ + pprev = &ot_base_root->child; + for (np = ot_base_root->child; np; np = np->sibling) { + if (!of_node_cmp(np->name, "__local_fixups__")) { + *pprev = np->sibling; + break; + } + pprev = &np->sibling; + } + + + /* remove ot_base_root node "__symbols__" if in live tree*/ + of_symbols = of_get_child_by_name(of_root, "__symbols__"); + if (of_symbols) { + /* will have to graft properties from node into live tree */ + pprev = &ot_base_root->child; + for (np = ot_base_root->child; np; np = np->sibling) { + if (!of_node_cmp(np->name, "__symbols__")) { + ot_base_symbols = np; + *pprev = np->sibling; + break; + } + pprev = &np->sibling; + } + } + + for (np = ot_base_root->child; np; np = np->sibling) { + if (of_get_child_by_name(of_root, np->name)) { + unittest(0, "illegal node name in ot_base %s", + np->name); + return; + } + } + + /* + * __dtb_ot_base_begin is not allowed to have root properties, + * so only need to splice nodes into main device tree. + * + * root node of *ot_base_root will not be freed, it is lost + * memory. + */ + + for (np = ot_base_root->child; np; np = np->sibling) + np->parent = of_root; + + mutex_lock(&of_mutex); + + for (np = of_root->child; np; np = np->sibling) + last_sibling = np; + + if (last_sibling) + last_sibling->sibling = ot_base_root->child; + else + of_root->child = ot_base_root->child; + + for_each_of_allnodes_from(ot_base_root, np) + __of_attach_node_sysfs(np); + + if (of_symbols) { + for_each_property_of_node(ot_base_symbols, prop) { + ret = __of_add_property(of_symbols, prop); + if (ret) { + unittest(0, + "duplicate property '%s' in ot_base node __symbols__", + prop->name); + return; + } + ret = __of_add_property_sysfs(of_symbols, prop); + if (ret) { + unittest(0, + "unable to add property '%s' in ot_base node __symbols__ to sysfs", + prop->name); + return; + } + } + } + + mutex_unlock(&of_mutex); + + + /* now do the normal overlay usage test */ + + unittest(overlay_test_data_add(0), + "Adding overlay __dtb_ot_begin failed\n"); + + unittest(overlay_test_data_add(1), + "Adding overlay phandle conflict failed\n"); +} + +#else + +static inline __init void of_unittest_overlay_high_level(void) {} + +#endif + static int __init of_unittest(void) { struct device_node *np; @@ -1962,6 +2223,9 @@ static int __init of_unittest(void) /* Double check linkage after removing testcase data */ of_unittest_check_tree_linkage(); + + of_unittest_overlay_high_level(); + pr_info("end of unittest - %i passed, %i failed\n", unittest_results.passed, unittest_results.failed); -- Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays. 2017-04-24 5:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays frowand.list @ 2017-04-24 17:16 ` Rob Herring 2017-04-24 17:47 ` Frank Rowand 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2017-04-24 17:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frank Rowand Cc: Stephen Boyd, Michal Marek, devicetree, linux-kernel, Linux Kbuild mailing list On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:43 AM, <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> > > Existing overlay unit tests examine individual pieces of the overlay > code. The new tests target the entire process of applying an overlay. > > Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> > --- > > There are checkpatch warnings. I have reviewed them and feel they > can be ignored. > > drivers/of/fdt.c | 45 +++++ > drivers/of/of_private.h | 2 + > drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile | 17 +- > drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts | 53 ++++++ > drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts | 20 +++ > drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts | 71 ++++++++ > drivers/of/unittest.c | 264 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 7 files changed, 469 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts > create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts > create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts ot? Overlay Test? That's not very obvious if so. > diff --git a/drivers/of/fdt.c b/drivers/of/fdt.c > index e5ce4b59e162..54120ab8f322 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/fdt.c > +++ b/drivers/of/fdt.c > @@ -31,6 +31,8 @@ > #include <asm/setup.h> /* for COMMAND_LINE_SIZE */ > #include <asm/page.h> > > +#include "of_private.h" > + > /* > * of_fdt_limit_memory - limit the number of regions in the /memory node > * @limit: maximum entries > @@ -1256,11 +1258,54 @@ bool __init early_init_dt_scan(void *params) > */ > void __init unflatten_device_tree(void) > { > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_UNITTEST > + extern uint8_t __dtb_ot_base_begin[]; > + extern uint8_t __dtb_ot_base_end[]; > + struct device_node *ot_base_root; > + void *ot_base; > + u32 data_size; > + u32 size; > +#endif > + > __unflatten_device_tree(initial_boot_params, NULL, &of_root, > early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch, false); > > /* Get pointer to "/chosen" and "/aliases" nodes for use everywhere */ > of_alias_scan(early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch); Just make __unflatten_device_tree accessible to the unit test code and move all this to it. Then you don't need the ifdefery. Does this need to be immediately after unflattening the base tree? > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_UNITTEST > + /* > + * Base device tree for the overlay unittest. > + * Do as much as possible the same way as done for the normal FDT. > + * Have to stop before resolving phandles, because that uses kmalloc. > + */ > + > + data_size = __dtb_ot_base_end - __dtb_ot_base_begin; > + if (!data_size) { > + pr_err("No __dtb_ot_base_begin to attach\n"); > + return; > + } > + > + size = fdt_totalsize(__dtb_ot_base_begin); > + if (size != data_size) { > + pr_err("__dtb_ot_base_begin header totalsize != actual size"); > + return; > + } > + > + ot_base = early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch(size, > + roundup_pow_of_two(FDT_V17_SIZE)); > + if (!ot_base) { > + pr_err("alloc of ot_base failed"); > + return; > + } > + > + memcpy(ot_base, __dtb_ot_base_begin, size); > + > + __unflatten_device_tree(ot_base, NULL, &ot_base_root, > + early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch, true); > + > + unittest_set_ot_base_root(ot_base_root); > +#endif > } > > /** > diff --git a/drivers/of/of_private.h b/drivers/of/of_private.h > index f4f6793d2f04..02d54da078ac 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/of_private.h > +++ b/drivers/of/of_private.h > @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ static inline int of_property_notify(int action, struct device_node *np, > } > #endif /* CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC */ > > +extern void unittest_set_ot_base_root(struct device_node *dn); > + > /** > * General utilities for working with live trees. > * > diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile b/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile > index 1ac5cc01d627..6879befe29d2 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile > +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile > @@ -1,7 +1,18 @@ > obj-y += testcases.dtb.o > +obj-y += ot.dtb.o > +obj-y += ot_bad_phandle.dtb.o > +obj-y += ot_base.dtb.o > > targets += testcases.dtb testcases.dtb.S > +targets += ot.dtb ot.dtb.S > +targets += ot_bad_phandle.dtb ot_bad_phandle.dtb.S > +targets += ot_base.dtb ot_base.dtb.S > > -.SECONDARY: \ > - $(obj)/testcases.dtb.S \ > - $(obj)/testcases.dtb > +.PRECIOUS: \ > + $(obj)/%.dtb.S \ > + $(obj)/%.dtb > + > +# enable creation of __symbols__ node > +DTC_FLAGS_ot := -@ > +DTC_FLAGS_ot_base := -@ > +DTC_FLAGS_ot_bad_phandle := -@ > diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..37e105622b7a > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts > @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ > +/dts-v1/; > +/plugin/; > + > +/ { > + > + fragment@0 { > + target = <&electric_1>; > + > + __overlay__ { > + status = "ok"; > + > + hvac_2: hvac_large_1 { We should follow best practice here and not use '_' for node names. I wonder what warnings dtc throws with W=2 for the unittests. Don't think I tried that when adding them. > + compatible = "ot,hvac-large"; > + heat-range = < 40 75 >; > + cool-range = < 65 80 >; > + }; > + }; > + }; > + > + fragment@1 { > + target = <&rides_1>; > + > + __overlay__ { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + status = "ok"; > + > + ride@200 { > + compatible = "ot,ferris-wheel"; > + reg = < 0x00000200 0x100 >; > + hvac-provider = < &hvac_2 >; > + hvac-thermostat = < 27 32 > ; > + hvac-zones = < 12 5 >; > + hvac-zone-names = "operator", "snack-bar"; > + spin-controller = < &spin_ctrl_1 3 >; > + spin-rph = < 30 >; > + gondolas = < 16 >; > + gondola-capacity = < 6 >; > + }; > + }; > + }; > + > + fragment@2 { > + target = <&lights_2>; > + > + __overlay__ { > + status = "ok"; > + color = "purple", "white", "red", "green"; > + rate = < 3 256 >; > + }; > + }; > + > +}; > diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..234d5f1dcfe4 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts > @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ > +/dts-v1/; > +/plugin/; > + > +/ { > + > + fragment@0 { > + target = <&electric_1>; > + > + __overlay__ { > + > + // This label should cause an error when the overlay > + // is applied. There is already a phandle value > + // in the base tree for motor_1. > + spin_ctrl_1_conflict: motor_1 { > + accelerate = < 3 >; > + decelerate = < 5 >; > + }; > + }; > + }; > +}; > diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..0a4fbe598b02 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts > @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ > +/dts-v1/; > +/plugin/; > + > +/ { > + testcase-data-2 { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + > + electric_1: substation@100 { > + compatible = "ot,big-volts-control"; > + reg = < 0x00000100 0x100 >; > + status = "disabled"; > + > + hvac_1: hvac_medium_1 { > + compatible = "ot,hvac-medium"; > + heat-range = < 50 75 >; > + cool-range = < 60 80 >; > + }; > + > + spin_ctrl_1: motor_1 { > + compatible = "ot,ferris-wheel-motor"; > + spin = "clockwise"; > + }; > + > + spin_ctrl_2: motor_8 { > + compatible = "ot,roller-coaster-motor"; > + }; > + }; > + > + rides_1: fairway_1 { > + #address-cells = <1>; > + #size-cells = <1>; > + compatible = "ot,rides"; > + status = "disabled"; > + orientation = < 127 >; > + > + ride@100 { > + compatible = "ot,roller-coaster"; > + reg = < 0x00000100 0x100 >; > + hvac-provider = < &hvac_1 >; > + hvac-thermostat = < 29 > ; > + hvac-zones = < 14 >; > + hvac-zone-names = "operator"; > + spin-controller = < &spin_ctrl_2 5 &spin_ctrl_2 7 >; > + spin-controller-names = "track_1", "track_2"; > + queues = < 2 >; > + }; > + }; > + > + lights_1: lights@30000 { > + compatible = "ot,work-lights"; > + reg = < 0x00030000 0x1000 >; > + status = "disabled"; > + }; > + > + lights_2: lights@40000 { > + compatible = "ot,show-lights"; > + reg = < 0x00040000 0x1000 >; > + status = "disabled"; > + rate = < 13 138 >; > + }; > + > + retail_1: vending@50000 { > + reg = < 0x00050000 0x1000 >; > + compatible = "ot,tickets"; > + status = "disabled"; > + }; > + > + }; > +}; > + > diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest.c b/drivers/of/unittest.c > index 62db55b97c10..599eb10e9b40 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/unittest.c > +++ b/drivers/of/unittest.c > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ > #include <linux/err.h> > #include <linux/errno.h> > #include <linux/hashtable.h> > +#include <linux/libfdt.h> > #include <linux/of.h> > #include <linux/of_fdt.h> > #include <linux/of_irq.h> > @@ -42,6 +43,13 @@ > failed; \ > }) > > +static struct device_node *ot_base_root; > + > +void unittest_set_ot_base_root(struct device_node *dn) > +{ > + ot_base_root = dn; > +} > + > static void __init of_unittest_find_node_by_name(void) > { > struct device_node *np; > @@ -1925,6 +1933,259 @@ static void __init of_unittest_overlay(void) > static inline void __init of_unittest_overlay(void) { } > #endif > > +#define OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(name) \ > + extern uint8_t __dtb_##name##_begin[]; \ > + extern uint8_t __dtb_##name##_end[] > + > +#define OVERLAY_INFO(name, expected) \ > +{ .dtb_begin = __dtb_##name##_begin, \ > + .dtb_end = __dtb_##name##_end, \ > + .expected_result = expected, \ > +} > + > +struct overlay_info { > + uint8_t *dtb_begin; > + uint8_t *dtb_end; > + void *data; > + struct device_node *np_overlay; > + int expected_result; > + int overlay_id; > +}; > + > +OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(ot); > +OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(ot_bad_phandle); > + > +struct overlay_info overlays[] = { > + OVERLAY_INFO(ot, 0), > + OVERLAY_INFO(ot_bad_phandle, -EINVAL), > + {} > +}; > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_OVERLAY > +/* > + * The purpose of of_unittest_overlay_test_data_add is to add an > + * overlay in the normal fashion. This is a test of the whole > + * picture, instead of testing individual elements. > + * > + * A secondary purpose is to be able to verify that the contents of > + * /proc/device-tree/ contains the updated structure and values from > + * the overlay. That must be verified separately in user space. > + * > + * Return 0 on unexpected error. > + */ > +static int __init overlay_test_data_add(int onum) There's a need for a general function to apply built-in overlays beyond just unittests. See drivers/gpu/drm/tilcdc/tilcdc_slave_compat.c. It's pretty close to the same set of calls. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays. 2017-04-24 17:16 ` Rob Herring @ 2017-04-24 17:47 ` Frank Rowand 2017-04-24 20:40 ` Rob Herring 0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread From: Frank Rowand @ 2017-04-24 17:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Rob Herring Cc: Stephen Boyd, Michal Marek, devicetree, linux-kernel, Linux Kbuild mailing list On 04/24/17 10:16, Rob Herring wrote: > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:43 AM, <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: >> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> >> >> Existing overlay unit tests examine individual pieces of the overlay >> code. The new tests target the entire process of applying an overlay. >> >> Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> >> --- >> >> There are checkpatch warnings. I have reviewed them and feel they >> can be ignored. >> >> drivers/of/fdt.c | 45 +++++ >> drivers/of/of_private.h | 2 + >> drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile | 17 +- >> drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts | 53 ++++++ >> drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts | 20 +++ >> drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts | 71 ++++++++ >> drivers/of/unittest.c | 264 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 7 files changed, 469 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts >> create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts >> create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts > > ot? Overlay Test? That's not very obvious if so. Yes, and yes. I'll make more explicit. > >> diff --git a/drivers/of/fdt.c b/drivers/of/fdt.c >> index e5ce4b59e162..54120ab8f322 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/fdt.c >> +++ b/drivers/of/fdt.c >> @@ -31,6 +31,8 @@ >> #include <asm/setup.h> /* for COMMAND_LINE_SIZE */ >> #include <asm/page.h> >> >> +#include "of_private.h" >> + >> /* >> * of_fdt_limit_memory - limit the number of regions in the /memory node >> * @limit: maximum entries >> @@ -1256,11 +1258,54 @@ bool __init early_init_dt_scan(void *params) >> */ >> void __init unflatten_device_tree(void) >> { >> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_UNITTEST >> + extern uint8_t __dtb_ot_base_begin[]; >> + extern uint8_t __dtb_ot_base_end[]; >> + struct device_node *ot_base_root; >> + void *ot_base; >> + u32 data_size; >> + u32 size; >> +#endif >> + >> __unflatten_device_tree(initial_boot_params, NULL, &of_root, >> early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch, false); >> >> /* Get pointer to "/chosen" and "/aliases" nodes for use everywhere */ >> of_alias_scan(early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch); > > Just make __unflatten_device_tree accessible to the unit test code and > move all this to it. Then you don't need the ifdefery. Good idea. I'll do that. > Does this need to be immediately after unflattening the base tree? My goal is to make the creation of the test data in the tree follow the normal process as much as possible, so that real code is tested instead of testing test code. This flattened device tree contains the base information that the test overlays are applied against. >> + >> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_UNITTEST >> + /* >> + * Base device tree for the overlay unittest. >> + * Do as much as possible the same way as done for the normal FDT. >> + * Have to stop before resolving phandles, because that uses kmalloc. >> + */ >> + >> + data_size = __dtb_ot_base_end - __dtb_ot_base_begin; >> + if (!data_size) { >> + pr_err("No __dtb_ot_base_begin to attach\n"); >> + return; >> + } >> + >> + size = fdt_totalsize(__dtb_ot_base_begin); >> + if (size != data_size) { >> + pr_err("__dtb_ot_base_begin header totalsize != actual size"); >> + return; >> + } >> + >> + ot_base = early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch(size, >> + roundup_pow_of_two(FDT_V17_SIZE)); >> + if (!ot_base) { >> + pr_err("alloc of ot_base failed"); >> + return; >> + } >> + >> + memcpy(ot_base, __dtb_ot_base_begin, size); >> + >> + __unflatten_device_tree(ot_base, NULL, &ot_base_root, >> + early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch, true); >> + >> + unittest_set_ot_base_root(ot_base_root); >> +#endif >> } >> >> /** >> diff --git a/drivers/of/of_private.h b/drivers/of/of_private.h >> index f4f6793d2f04..02d54da078ac 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/of_private.h >> +++ b/drivers/of/of_private.h >> @@ -55,6 +55,8 @@ static inline int of_property_notify(int action, struct device_node *np, >> } >> #endif /* CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC */ >> >> +extern void unittest_set_ot_base_root(struct device_node *dn); >> + >> /** >> * General utilities for working with live trees. >> * >> diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile b/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile >> index 1ac5cc01d627..6879befe29d2 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile >> +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile >> @@ -1,7 +1,18 @@ >> obj-y += testcases.dtb.o >> +obj-y += ot.dtb.o >> +obj-y += ot_bad_phandle.dtb.o >> +obj-y += ot_base.dtb.o >> >> targets += testcases.dtb testcases.dtb.S >> +targets += ot.dtb ot.dtb.S >> +targets += ot_bad_phandle.dtb ot_bad_phandle.dtb.S >> +targets += ot_base.dtb ot_base.dtb.S >> >> -.SECONDARY: \ >> - $(obj)/testcases.dtb.S \ >> - $(obj)/testcases.dtb >> +.PRECIOUS: \ >> + $(obj)/%.dtb.S \ >> + $(obj)/%.dtb >> + >> +# enable creation of __symbols__ node >> +DTC_FLAGS_ot := -@ >> +DTC_FLAGS_ot_base := -@ >> +DTC_FLAGS_ot_bad_phandle := -@ >> diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..37e105622b7a >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot.dts >> @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ >> +/dts-v1/; >> +/plugin/; >> + >> +/ { >> + >> + fragment@0 { >> + target = <&electric_1>; >> + >> + __overlay__ { >> + status = "ok"; >> + >> + hvac_2: hvac_large_1 { > > We should follow best practice here and not use '_' for node names. I > wonder what warnings dtc throws with W=2 for the unittests. Don't > think I tried that when adding them. Oops. Will fix. >> + compatible = "ot,hvac-large"; >> + heat-range = < 40 75 >; >> + cool-range = < 65 80 >; >> + }; >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> + fragment@1 { >> + target = <&rides_1>; >> + >> + __overlay__ { >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <1>; >> + status = "ok"; >> + >> + ride@200 { >> + compatible = "ot,ferris-wheel"; >> + reg = < 0x00000200 0x100 >; >> + hvac-provider = < &hvac_2 >; >> + hvac-thermostat = < 27 32 > ; >> + hvac-zones = < 12 5 >; >> + hvac-zone-names = "operator", "snack-bar"; >> + spin-controller = < &spin_ctrl_1 3 >; >> + spin-rph = < 30 >; >> + gondolas = < 16 >; >> + gondola-capacity = < 6 >; >> + }; >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> + fragment@2 { >> + target = <&lights_2>; >> + >> + __overlay__ { >> + status = "ok"; >> + color = "purple", "white", "red", "green"; >> + rate = < 3 256 >; >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> +}; >> diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..234d5f1dcfe4 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_bad_phandle.dts >> @@ -0,0 +1,20 @@ >> +/dts-v1/; >> +/plugin/; >> + >> +/ { >> + >> + fragment@0 { >> + target = <&electric_1>; >> + >> + __overlay__ { >> + >> + // This label should cause an error when the overlay >> + // is applied. There is already a phandle value >> + // in the base tree for motor_1. >> + spin_ctrl_1_conflict: motor_1 { >> + accelerate = < 3 >; >> + decelerate = < 5 >; >> + }; >> + }; >> + }; >> +}; >> diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts >> new file mode 100644 >> index 000000000000..0a4fbe598b02 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/ot_base.dts >> @@ -0,0 +1,71 @@ >> +/dts-v1/; >> +/plugin/; >> + >> +/ { >> + testcase-data-2 { >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <1>; >> + >> + electric_1: substation@100 { >> + compatible = "ot,big-volts-control"; >> + reg = < 0x00000100 0x100 >; >> + status = "disabled"; >> + >> + hvac_1: hvac_medium_1 { >> + compatible = "ot,hvac-medium"; >> + heat-range = < 50 75 >; >> + cool-range = < 60 80 >; >> + }; >> + >> + spin_ctrl_1: motor_1 { >> + compatible = "ot,ferris-wheel-motor"; >> + spin = "clockwise"; >> + }; >> + >> + spin_ctrl_2: motor_8 { >> + compatible = "ot,roller-coaster-motor"; >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> + rides_1: fairway_1 { >> + #address-cells = <1>; >> + #size-cells = <1>; >> + compatible = "ot,rides"; >> + status = "disabled"; >> + orientation = < 127 >; >> + >> + ride@100 { >> + compatible = "ot,roller-coaster"; >> + reg = < 0x00000100 0x100 >; >> + hvac-provider = < &hvac_1 >; >> + hvac-thermostat = < 29 > ; >> + hvac-zones = < 14 >; >> + hvac-zone-names = "operator"; >> + spin-controller = < &spin_ctrl_2 5 &spin_ctrl_2 7 >; >> + spin-controller-names = "track_1", "track_2"; >> + queues = < 2 >; >> + }; >> + }; >> + >> + lights_1: lights@30000 { >> + compatible = "ot,work-lights"; >> + reg = < 0x00030000 0x1000 >; >> + status = "disabled"; >> + }; >> + >> + lights_2: lights@40000 { >> + compatible = "ot,show-lights"; >> + reg = < 0x00040000 0x1000 >; >> + status = "disabled"; >> + rate = < 13 138 >; >> + }; >> + >> + retail_1: vending@50000 { >> + reg = < 0x00050000 0x1000 >; >> + compatible = "ot,tickets"; >> + status = "disabled"; >> + }; >> + >> + }; >> +}; >> + >> diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest.c b/drivers/of/unittest.c >> index 62db55b97c10..599eb10e9b40 100644 >> --- a/drivers/of/unittest.c >> +++ b/drivers/of/unittest.c >> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ >> #include <linux/err.h> >> #include <linux/errno.h> >> #include <linux/hashtable.h> >> +#include <linux/libfdt.h> >> #include <linux/of.h> >> #include <linux/of_fdt.h> >> #include <linux/of_irq.h> >> @@ -42,6 +43,13 @@ >> failed; \ >> }) >> >> +static struct device_node *ot_base_root; >> + >> +void unittest_set_ot_base_root(struct device_node *dn) >> +{ >> + ot_base_root = dn; >> +} >> + >> static void __init of_unittest_find_node_by_name(void) >> { >> struct device_node *np; >> @@ -1925,6 +1933,259 @@ static void __init of_unittest_overlay(void) >> static inline void __init of_unittest_overlay(void) { } >> #endif >> >> +#define OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(name) \ >> + extern uint8_t __dtb_##name##_begin[]; \ >> + extern uint8_t __dtb_##name##_end[] >> + >> +#define OVERLAY_INFO(name, expected) \ >> +{ .dtb_begin = __dtb_##name##_begin, \ >> + .dtb_end = __dtb_##name##_end, \ >> + .expected_result = expected, \ >> +} >> + >> +struct overlay_info { >> + uint8_t *dtb_begin; >> + uint8_t *dtb_end; >> + void *data; >> + struct device_node *np_overlay; >> + int expected_result; >> + int overlay_id; >> +}; >> + >> +OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(ot); >> +OVERLAY_INFO_EXTERN(ot_bad_phandle); >> + >> +struct overlay_info overlays[] = { >> + OVERLAY_INFO(ot, 0), >> + OVERLAY_INFO(ot_bad_phandle, -EINVAL), >> + {} >> +}; >> + >> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_OVERLAY >> +/* >> + * The purpose of of_unittest_overlay_test_data_add is to add an >> + * overlay in the normal fashion. This is a test of the whole >> + * picture, instead of testing individual elements. >> + * >> + * A secondary purpose is to be able to verify that the contents of >> + * /proc/device-tree/ contains the updated structure and values from >> + * the overlay. That must be verified separately in user space. >> + * >> + * Return 0 on unexpected error. >> + */ >> +static int __init overlay_test_data_add(int onum) > > There's a need for a general function to apply built-in overlays > beyond just unittests. See > drivers/gpu/drm/tilcdc/tilcdc_slave_compat.c. It's pretty close to the > same set of calls. Yes, agreed. My plan in the next release cycle is to first clean up drivers/of/overlay.c. No functional changes, just cosmetic such as aligning function names with what they actually do. Then make some (hopefully) minor correctness changes, such as locking correctly around phandle adjustments. Then create the general function to apply built-in overlays and convert all (two) separate implementations to use the common function. I did not want to delay adding the unit tests to wait for this step. > Rob > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays. 2017-04-24 17:47 ` Frank Rowand @ 2017-04-24 20:40 ` Rob Herring 0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread From: Rob Herring @ 2017-04-24 20:40 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Frank Rowand Cc: Stephen Boyd, Michal Marek, devicetree, linux-kernel, Linux Kbuild mailing list On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:47 PM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: > On 04/24/17 10:16, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:43 AM, <frowand.list@gmail.com> wrote: >>> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> >>> >>> Existing overlay unit tests examine individual pieces of the overlay >>> code. The new tests target the entire process of applying an overlay. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@sony.com> [...] >>> @@ -1256,11 +1258,54 @@ bool __init early_init_dt_scan(void *params) >>> */ >>> void __init unflatten_device_tree(void) >>> { >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_UNITTEST >>> + extern uint8_t __dtb_ot_base_begin[]; >>> + extern uint8_t __dtb_ot_base_end[]; >>> + struct device_node *ot_base_root; >>> + void *ot_base; >>> + u32 data_size; >>> + u32 size; >>> +#endif >>> + >>> __unflatten_device_tree(initial_boot_params, NULL, &of_root, >>> early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch, false); >>> >>> /* Get pointer to "/chosen" and "/aliases" nodes for use everywhere */ >>> of_alias_scan(early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch); >> >> Just make __unflatten_device_tree accessible to the unit test code and >> move all this to it. Then you don't need the ifdefery. > > Good idea. I'll do that. > > >> Does this need to be immediately after unflattening the base tree? > > My goal is to make the creation of the test data in the tree follow > the normal process as much as possible, so that real code is tested > instead of testing test code. > > This flattened device tree contains the base information that the > test overlays are applied against. Okay. If you need it here, then you can put this all into a unittest function and call it from here. >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_OVERLAY >>> +/* >>> + * The purpose of of_unittest_overlay_test_data_add is to add an >>> + * overlay in the normal fashion. This is a test of the whole >>> + * picture, instead of testing individual elements. >>> + * >>> + * A secondary purpose is to be able to verify that the contents of >>> + * /proc/device-tree/ contains the updated structure and values from >>> + * the overlay. That must be verified separately in user space. >>> + * >>> + * Return 0 on unexpected error. >>> + */ >>> +static int __init overlay_test_data_add(int onum) >> >> There's a need for a general function to apply built-in overlays >> beyond just unittests. See >> drivers/gpu/drm/tilcdc/tilcdc_slave_compat.c. It's pretty close to the >> same set of calls. > > Yes, agreed. > > My plan in the next release cycle is to first clean up drivers/of/overlay.c. > No functional changes, just cosmetic such as aligning function names with > what they actually do. > > Then make some (hopefully) minor correctness changes, such as locking > correctly around phandle adjustments. > > Then create the general function to apply built-in overlays and convert > all (two) separate implementations to use the common function. I did > not want to delay adding the unit tests to wait for this step. Okay. Whatever order you want to do it is fine. Rob ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-04-24 20:41 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2017-04-24 5:43 [PATCH 0/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays frowand.list 2017-04-24 5:43 ` [PATCH 1/2] of: add support of dtc compiler flags for device tree overlays frowand.list 2017-04-24 5:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays frowand.list 2017-04-24 17:16 ` Rob Herring 2017-04-24 17:47 ` Frank Rowand 2017-04-24 20:40 ` Rob Herring
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).