| Message ID | 20230302013822.1808711-2-sboyd@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | clk: Add kunit tests for fixed rate and parent data | expand |
On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 09:38, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote: > > Document the linux,kunit board compatible string. This board is loaded > into the Linux kernel when KUnit is testing devicetree dependent code. As with the series as a whole, this might need to change a little bit if we want to either use devicetree overlays and/or other architectures. That being said, I'm okay with having this until then: the only real topic for bikeshedding is the name. - Is KUnit best as a board name, or part of the vendor name? - Do we want to include the architecture in the name? Should it be "linux,kunit", "linux-kunit,uml", "linux,kunit-uml", etc? > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org> > Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev> > Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> > Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> > --- > .../bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml | 24 +++++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml > > diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml > new file mode 100644 > index 000000000000..dfe6da4796e8 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) > +%YAML 1.2 > +--- > +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml# > +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# > + > +title: KUnit > + > +maintainers: > + - Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> > + - David Gow <davidgow@google.com> > + > +description: > + KUnit board used to unit test the Linux kernel in User Mode Linux (UML). > + > +properties: > + $nodename: > + const: "/" > + compatible: > + const: linux,kunit > + > +additionalProperties: true > + > +... > -- > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/clk/linux.git/ > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/sboyd/spmi.git >
Hi David, On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 8:16 AM David Gow <davidgow@google.com> wrote: > On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 09:38, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote: > > Document the linux,kunit board compatible string. This board is loaded > > into the Linux kernel when KUnit is testing devicetree dependent code. > > As with the series as a whole, this might need to change a little bit > if we want to either use devicetree overlays and/or other > architectures. > > That being said, I'm okay with having this until then: the only real > topic for bikeshedding is the name. > - Is KUnit best as a board name, or part of the vendor name? > - Do we want to include the architecture in the name? > Should it be "linux,kunit", "linux-kunit,uml", "linux,kunit-uml", etc? I would not include an architecture (or virtualization method), as this is independent of the architecture or virtualization method. Gr{oetje,eeting}s, Geert
On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 at 07:12, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote: > > Quoting David Gow (2023-03-02 23:14:55) > > On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 09:38, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > > Document the linux,kunit board compatible string. This board is loaded > > > into the Linux kernel when KUnit is testing devicetree dependent code. > > > > As with the series as a whole, this might need to change a little bit > > if we want to either use devicetree overlays and/or other > > architectures. > > > > That being said, I'm okay with having this until then: the only real > > topic for bikeshedding is the name. > > - Is KUnit best as a board name, or part of the vendor name? > > - Do we want to include the architecture in the name? > > Should it be "linux,kunit", "linux-kunit,uml", "linux,kunit-uml", etc? > > I think I will drop this patch. I have overlays working. I hijacked > of_core_init() to load the testcase data from drivers/of/unittest-data > and made a container node for kunit overlays to apply to. Makes sense to me, thanks! Looking forward to seeing how the overlays work in practice!
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..dfe6da4796e8 --- /dev/null +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@ +# SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0-only OR BSD-2-Clause) +%YAML 1.2 +--- +$id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml# +$schema: http://devicetree.org/meta-schemas/core.yaml# + +title: KUnit + +maintainers: + - Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins@google.com> + - David Gow <davidgow@google.com> + +description: + KUnit board used to unit test the Linux kernel in User Mode Linux (UML). + +properties: + $nodename: + const: "/" + compatible: + const: linux,kunit + +additionalProperties: true + +...
Document the linux,kunit board compatible string. This board is loaded into the Linux kernel when KUnit is testing devicetree dependent code. Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org> Cc: Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev> Cc: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> --- .../bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml | 24 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+) create mode 100644 Documentation/devicetree/bindings/kunit/linux,kunit.yaml