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