linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V11 0/5] dt: Add fdtoverlay rule and statically build unittest

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: <c3139c14-2099-a74d-5084-877c1532343f@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Mar 2021 00:46:39 -0600
From:   Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
To:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
Cc:     Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
        Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
        anmar.oueja@...aro.org, Bill Mills <bill.mills@...aro.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V11 0/5] dt: Add fdtoverlay rule and statically build
 unittest

On 3/11/21 10:31 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 11-03-21, 17:27, Frank Rowand wrote:
>> On 3/9/21 11:35 PM, Viresh Kumar wrote:
>>> Viresh Kumar (4):
>>>   kbuild: Simplify builds with CONFIG_OF_ALL_DTBS
>>>   kbuild: Allow .dtso format for overlay source files
>>>   of: unittest: Create overlay_common.dtsi and testcases_common.dtsi
>>>   of: unittest: Statically apply overlays using fdtoverlay
>>>
>>>  drivers/of/unittest-data/Makefile             | 48 ++++++++++
>>>  drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_base.dts     | 90 +-----------------
>>>  drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_common.dtsi  | 91 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>  drivers/of/unittest-data/static_base_1.dts    |  4 +
>>>  drivers/of/unittest-data/static_base_2.dts    |  4 +
>>>  drivers/of/unittest-data/testcases.dts        | 23 ++---
>>>  .../of/unittest-data/testcases_common.dtsi    | 19 ++++
>>>  .../of/unittest-data/tests-interrupts.dtsi    | 11 +--
>>>  scripts/Makefile.lib                          | 40 ++++++--
>>>  9 files changed, 218 insertions(+), 112 deletions(-)
>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/overlay_common.dtsi
>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/static_base_1.dts
>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/static_base_2.dts
>>>  create mode 100644 drivers/of/unittest-data/testcases_common.dtsi
>>>
>>>
>>> base-commit: a38fd8748464831584a19438cbb3082b5a2dab15
>>>
>>
>> Does not apply to 5.12-rc2
> 
> I was based right over the 5.12-rc2 tag.

I don't know why I failed.  Given your report, I went back to
v5.12-rc2 and the patch series applies fine.

Either way, my tags are ok.

> 
>> because of a dependency on a patch to
>> scripts/Makefile.lib.  That patch has been merged by Linus
>> somewhere between -rc2 and -rc3.
> 
> git log --oneline v5.12-rc2..origin/master -- scripts/Makefile.lib
> 
> gives no results to me.
> 
>> I had a working version
>> between -rc2 and -rc3 at commit e6f197677b2e
> 
> I have tried both Linus' tree and linux-next, and I don't see this
> commit.

Sorry about that, the commit id I gave was after applying the patch
series.  The commit id I should have reported is 144c79ef3353.

-Frank

> 
>> that does have
>> the required patch, so that is the version I used to test
>> this series.
>>
>> There is still confusion caused by the contortions that unittest
>> goes through to mis-use base DTBs vs overlay DTBs, so _after_
>> this series is merged by Rob, I will poke around and see if
>> I can change unittest so that it does not look like it is
>> mis-using DTBs and overlay DTBs.
>>
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...y.com>
>> Tested-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...y.com>
> 
> Thanks.
>