Djam/u-boot
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/u-boot/u-boot.git synced 2025-04-26 07:17:10 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

test: boot: fix bootflow_cmd_label for when DSA_SANDBOX is disabled

Browse source 
When DSA_SANDBOX is not set, the sandbox tests fail as follows:

 $ ./test/py/test.py --build-dir=$(pwd) -k bootdev_test_any
 [...]
 Scanning for bootflows with label '9'
 [...]
 Cannot find '9' (err=-19)

This is due to the device list containing two less entries than
expected. Therefore, look for label '7' when DSA_SANDBOX is disabled.

The actual use case is NET_LWIP=y (to be introduced in later patches)
which implies DSA_SANDBOX=n for the time being.

Signed-off-by: Jerome Forissier <jerome.forissier@linaro.org>
This commit is contained in:
Jerome Forissier 2024-10-16 11:56:26 +02:00 • committed by Tom Rini
parent 69aee0c802
commit 625d40ab12
1 changed files with 10 additions and 2 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

8
test/boot/bootflow.c
View file

@ -109,9 +109,17 @@ static int bootflow_cmd_label(struct unit_test_state *uts)
* 8 [ ] OK mmc mmc2.bootdev * 8 [ ] OK mmc mmc2.bootdev
* 9 [ + ] OK mmc mmc1.bootdev * 9 [ + ] OK mmc mmc1.bootdev
* a [ ] OK mmc mmc0.bootdev * a [ ] OK mmc mmc0.bootdev
*
* However with CONFIG_DSA_SANDBOX=n we have two fewer (dsa-test@0 and
* dsa-test@1).
*/ */
if (CONFIG_IS_ENABLED(DSA_SANDBOX)) {
ut_assertok(run_command("bootflow scan -lH 9", 0)); ut_assertok(run_command("bootflow scan -lH 9", 0));
ut_assert_nextline("Scanning for bootflows with label '9'"); ut_assert_nextline("Scanning for bootflows with label '9'");
} else {
ut_assertok(run_command("bootflow scan -lH 7", 0));
ut_assert_nextline("Scanning for bootflows with label '7'");
}
ut_assert_skip_to_line("(1 bootflow, 1 valid)"); ut_assert_skip_to_line("(1 bootflow, 1 valid)");
ut_assertok(run_command("bootflow scan -lH 0", 0)); ut_assertok(run_command("bootflow scan -lH 0", 0));