Re: [PATCH V6 5/6] of: unittest: Create overlay_common.dtsi and testcases_common.dtsi

[Viresh Kumar]

On 23-01-21, 14:07, David Gibson wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2021 at 04:20:35PM +0530, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> > In order to build-test the same unit-test files using fdtoverlay tool,
> > move the device nodes from the existing overlay_base.dts and
> > testcases_common.dts files to .dtsi files. The .dts files now include
> > the new .dtsi files, resulting in exactly the same behavior as earlier.
> > 
> > The .dtsi files can now be reused for compile time tests using
> > fdtoverlay (will be done in a later patch).
> > 
> > This is required because the base files passed to fdtoverlay tool
> > shouldn't be overlays themselves (i.e. shouldn't have the /plugin/;
> > tag).
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_base.dts     | 90 +-----------------
> >  drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_common.dtsi  | 91 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  drivers/of/unittest-data/testcases.dts        | 17 +---
> >  .../of/unittest-data/testcases_common.dtsi    | 18 ++++
> >  4 files changed, 111 insertions(+), 105 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_common.dtsi
> >  create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/testcases_common.dtsi
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_base.dts b/drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_base.dts
> > index 99ab9d12d00b..ab9014589c5d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_base.dts
> > +++ b/drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_base.dts
> > @@ -2,92 +2,4 @@
> >  /dts-v1/;
> >  /plugin/;
> 
> This still makes no sense to me.  Is this data intended as a base
> tree, or as an overlay?  If it's an overlay, what are the constraints
> on the base tree it's supposed to apply to.
> 
> This patch is treating it as both in different places, but that's such
> a bizarre usecase it needs detailed justification.  It really looks
> like the unittest stuff is doing some very bogus stuff that should be
> fixed first, before trying to do this on top.

I will let Frank respond to that :)

-- 
viresh