linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] of: Add KUnit test to confirm DTB is loaded

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: <CAMuHMdUuP5Ya2gU3V_ET=Ji_+yx+jr7eCch5uDJSqvQN9jJM3g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Feb 2024 20:55:29 +0100
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, patches@...ts.linux.dev, 
	linux-um@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	kunit-dev@...glegroups.com, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, 
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>, 
	Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/7] of: Add KUnit test to confirm DTB is loaded

Hi Stephen,

On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 8:19 PM Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org> wrote:
> Quoting David Gow (2024-02-02 20:10:17)
> > On Sat, 3 Feb 2024 at 03:59, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org> wrote:
> > > Add a KUnit test that confirms a DTB has been loaded, i.e. there is a
> > > root node, and that the of_have_populated_dt() API works properly.
> > >
> > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
> > > Cc: Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
> > > Cc: David Gow <davidgow@...gle.com>
> > > Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@...ux.dev>
> > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
> > > ---
> >
> > This looks pretty good to me test-wise, though it still fails on m68k.
> > (Everything else I tried it on works, though I've definitely not tried
> > _every_ architecture.)
> >
> > aarch64: PASSED
> > i386: PASSED
> > x86_64: PASSED
> > x86_64 KASAN: PASSED
> > powerpc64: PASSED
> > UML: PASSED
> > UML LLVM: PASSED
> > m68k: FAILED
> > > $ qemu-system-m68k -nodefaults -m 1024 -kernel .kunit-all-m68k/vmlinux -append 'kunit.enable=1 console=hvc0 kunit_shutdown=reboot' -no-reboot -nographic -serial stdio -machine virt
> > > [11:55:05] ===================== dtb (2 subtests) =====================
> > > [11:55:05] # dtb_root_node_found_by_path: EXPECTATION FAILED at drivers/of/of_test.c:18
> > > [11:55:05] Expected np is not null, but is
> > > [11:55:05] [FAILED] dtb_root_node_found_by_path
> > > [11:55:05] # dtb_root_node_populates_of_root: EXPECTATION FAILED at drivers/of/of_test.c:28
> > > [11:55:05] Expected of_root is not null, but is
> > > [11:55:05] [FAILED] dtb_root_node_populates_of_root
> > > [11:55:05]     # module: of_test
> > > [11:55:05] # dtb: pass:0 fail:2 skip:0 total:2
> > > [11:55:05] # Totals: pass:0 fail:2 skip:0 total:2
> > > [11:55:05] ======================= [FAILED] dtb =======================
>
> Ah yeah I forgot to mention that. m68k fails because it doesn't call the
> unflatten_(and_copy)?_device_tree() function, so we don't populate a
> root node on that architecture. One solution would be to make CONFIG_OF
> unavailable on m68k. Or we have to make sure DT works on any
> architecture. Rob, what do you prefer here?

I guess the latter?
Alpha, hexagon, parisc, s390, and sparc are also lacking calls
to unflatten.*device_tree().

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68korg

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds