linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <597A7B4F.2000702@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 27 Jul 2017 16:46:23 -0700
From:   Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
To:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Cc:     Stephen Boyd <stephen.boyd@...aro.org>,
        Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.com>,
        "devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] of: Add unit tests for applying overlays

On 07/25/17 13:36, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 7:09 PM,  <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
>> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...y.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@...y.com>
>> ---
> 
> [...]
> 
>> @@ -1261,6 +1263,8 @@ void __init unflatten_device_tree(void)
>>
>>         /* Get pointer to "/chosen" and "/aliases" nodes for use everywhere */
>>         of_alias_scan(early_init_dt_alloc_memory_arch);
>> +
>> +       unittest_unflatten_overlay_base();
> 
> This breaks on systems that don't boot with FDT and call
> unflatten_device_tree, namely x86 and UML (UML needs a few hacks to
> work) which was a feature of the unittest. Considering applying
> overlays on x86 is something we'll want to support, the unittest
> should support that case.
> 
> Rob
> 

I meant to reply when I read this...

I'll look at this, probably next week.  Thanks for pointing out
the issue.

-Frank