linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V6 5/6] of: unittest: Create overlay_common.dtsi and testcases

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: <ff39a4ff-ee73-8f70-fddb-f869f5317c6a@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 25 Jan 2021 21:18:43 -0600
From:   Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
To:     David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, anmar.oueja@...aro.org,
        Bill Mills <bill.mills@...aro.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 5/6] of: unittest: Create overlay_common.dtsi and
 testcases_common.dtsi

On 1/22/21 9:07 PM, 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@...aro.org>
>> ---
>>  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.

I have already replied several times that this should not make sense to
anyone unless they read unittest.c and see in detail how these FDTs are
abused.  I have stated several times that the usage is bizarre and not
normal.

> 
> 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.
> 

The unittest stuff is bizarre, but it is correct.  This patch series does
not alter the current usage.

-Frank