Hi David, On Wed, Jul 19, 2023 at 05:13:45PM +0800, David Gow wrote: > On Wed, 28 Jun 2023 at 17:49, Maxime Ripard <mripard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > The root devices show some odd behaviours compared to regular "bus" devices > > that have been probed through the usual mechanism, so let's create kunit > > tests to exercise those paths and odd cases. > > > > Signed-off-by: Maxime Ripard <maxime@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx> Thanks! > There's definitely an argument that root devices are not supposed to > be like regular devices, and so devm_ managed resources aren't > supposed to work with them. Either way: > - It needs to be documented somewhere (and this test makes for good > documentation, IMO). > - It should be consistent: if devm_ isn't to be used with root > devices, it should fail everywhere, and if it is, it should work in > all the cases below. > > So I'm all in favour of including this test and making root devices work. I agree 100%. I've reworded the commit log a bit to make it clearer that's what we should strive for, and that this is what this patch is doing. > That being said, I am planning to send out a patchset adding a struct > kunit_device for use in tests, which will be attached to a "kunit" > bus. I think the combination of "fix devm_ with root devices" and > "don't recommend root devices as a 'fake' device for testing" is > probably the longer-term solution everyone can agree upon? Yeah, that sounds reasonable to me Maxime
