On Fri, Apr 01, 2016 at 01:50:18PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 9:27 PM, David Gibson
> <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 11:18:25AM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 12:29 AM, David Gibson
> >> <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 07:40:20PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
> >> >> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> >
> >> > Minor nit: before doing these tests, we should probably add a check
> >> > which ensures that any bus bridge node *has* a #address-cells and
> >> > #size-cells value.
> >>
> >> I'll check, but I thought we already had that check because any bridge
> >> node has reg or ranges.
> >>
> >> >
> >> >> ---
> >> >> checks.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> >> >> tests/run_tests.sh | 4 ++
> >> >> tests/unit-addr-leading-0s.dts | 10 ++++
> >> >> tests/unit-addr-leading-0x.dts | 10 ++++
> >> >> tests/unit-addr-simple-bus-comma.dts | 18 ++++++
> >> >> tests/unit-addr-simple-bus-reg-mismatch.dts | 18 ++++++
> >> >> 6 files changed, 142 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >> >> create mode 100644 tests/unit-addr-leading-0s.dts
> >> >> create mode 100644 tests/unit-addr-leading-0x.dts
> >> >> create mode 100644 tests/unit-addr-simple-bus-comma.dts
> >> >> create mode 100644 tests/unit-addr-simple-bus-reg-mismatch.dts
> >> >>
> >> >> diff --git a/checks.c b/checks.c
> >> >> index 48e926e..82a7f38 100644
> >> >> --- a/checks.c
> >> >> +++ b/checks.c
> >> >> @@ -20,6 +20,11 @@
> >> >>
> >> >> #include "dtc.h"
> >> >>
> >> >> +#define node_addr_cells(n) \
> >> >> + (((n)->addr_cells == -1) ? 2 : (n)->addr_cells)
> >> >> +#define node_size_cells(n) \
> >> >> + (((n)->size_cells == -1) ? 1 : (n)->size_cells)
> >> >> +
> >> >> #ifdef TRACE_CHECKS
> >> >> #define TRACE(c, ...) \
> >> >> do { \
> >> >> @@ -578,12 +583,88 @@ static bool is_simple_bridge(struct node *node)
> >> >> return false;
> >> >> }
> >> >>
> >> >> +static void default_unit_addr(struct check *c, struct node *dt, struct node *node)
> >> >> +{
> >> >> + const char *unitname = get_unitname(node);
> >> >> +
> >> >> + if (strstr(unitname, "0x") == unitname) {
> >> >> + FAIL(c, "Node %s unit address should not have leading \"0x\"",
> >> >> + node->fullpath);
> >> >> + /* skip over 0x for next test */
> >> >> + unitname += 2;
> >> >> + }
> >> >> + if (unitname[0] == '0' && isxdigit(unitname[1]))
> >> >> + FAIL(c, "Node %s unit address should not have leading 0s",
> >> >> + node->fullpath);
> >> >
> >> > Explicitly checking various aspects of the format seems a bit weird to
> >> > me. Why not just generate the expected address from 'reg' and
> >> > strcmp()?
> >>
> >> Because for the default check, I'm only testing these aspects. I found
> >> some cases running this thru the kernel tree dts files that the full
> >> simple-bus check is too strict. For example, we want to warn on
> >> "@0x002,4", but not "@2,4" or "@2blah".
> >
> > Ok. Thinking about it, I think this might work a bit better separated
> > (mostly) from the bus type stuff. Basically treat it as a "common
> > unit name problems" test, that will skip itself if a bus type is set
> > (which will allow more thorough testing of the unit name).
>
> Ha! That's pretty much back to my original patch, but with the
> addition of skipping the test if the bus type is known.
Heh, yeah, I guess it is. Sorry.
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
