From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f170.google.com (mail-pl1-f170.google.com [209.85.214.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CE12166F06 for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 16:19:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.170 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727453975; cv=none; b=Z18efsiA7jArWb4PLEE8cWT5Mba5/NX+eNHT0QCeQF+rSbkcgcq2MjcuBqheGkdAfgDFYRNhYN8JMc6mcUFq6HSADAZ0L26rpxuiT09PqNagkFTcrQ6yy4PjElXTDSjSn5ZY0+E4kBNXpL6MxdOkmH5hubJtlioTvCmZeE4sAw8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727453975; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pAzoEG02XkyNylD/xCeTTggYxDtr6Z4lPRJGRWG8dn8=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=c6uD9NbH70lxmzflYYXmgnxxOxDyGd+AtUyyYPFgtscF3FIklke/h+p1XF6fx6rdacsGoX7lu/BxwQMpybRHnASvSJcV/MvETX1AlrCZ0bpAumkdHgTJ1yFNyhTk0RrwLOyY7Y0QXTtsEWcKW4uYNjvHV+3PYCof8Eh1DHWRn4I= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=roeck-us.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=XQyE8KeW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.170 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=roeck-us.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="XQyE8KeW" Received: by mail-pl1-f170.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-20afdad26f5so30025265ad.1 for ; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:19:33 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1727453973; x=1728058773; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=QZ4WJkOwGqqQgF3m1LaEUK/eck934Y5jldk45Shajf8=; b=XQyE8KeWdrza916kW+/q0TU00Y4KCxQmsm7sDhgHmPBej2aW7Arh60MwS71kTrDMef pYgIiPMWb6xgHEXCeOT3c2hE6u3XT1JKYrhfxXBiBDDpapod/pQEKvOcVOndJnFmZ9Bm Z+RBit2iTCIp54Pf7M8Nnzybj10MdhsqyLVbWOr/Qh4Nvy3zcuh30UoKwk6Wh8zex6kM ZVm8rhNx35487t1s/63LBqnfyPo4BU9LuBrD/1Xx8anL2GjPHDMgyR4W2w8F4VSMYLvv vZBJetdTFUWt9YdEXoPzX/AOJqdTx1TPIwZJRGtqnCGX0A6V3v8jQHTeNzIQ3X7STQSh EL+A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1727453973; x=1728058773; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=QZ4WJkOwGqqQgF3m1LaEUK/eck934Y5jldk45Shajf8=; b=D4u0704HFUDUx9bn4y5ISOk5Fju2FCZxr9q+tNp7r0PETd7eBjL4vXRQWSe6PXC/S1 /6X2eZuFMWR2gaoOCY/ecGmr2fv2kVllromT6rWYlldPfFcC7O0gdChVLdVEryG8l0Rp MgZBuW+Pyaz+ETmhMbe2j7+xVoIuB6OD38kgwyHsDVxKm8gHE0gbix8PA0Kg1yrmqCrW GOyfWYuJv4sg7CVGg1LM7gXFuBKKaB8CYxup3d4XTk9/Yquu+1DY1oQ1wtLTyhUWLEeh eetmhLZpHpc/bfXeapXlPVgNq3qwJv6wlUU7t97K9CsN6tVkKSRJ09DZQ4PYymAySxkw pwQw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXtgSzfloKIVBencKb+Hul2BDHQ6Tf91vS2MQK1flUXlAq9Pdula1v832437VBgwjMnF3LJNH72@lists.linux.dev X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywbpb7QuhWFtsJiIaR3tynoBAW+W5xHUchUQO6jo/6zF0QPHpgb nYXhQ+YYxibIP9B0CTBQzc9OS4xo5a3VzCuMLCEIN5xOkH4quGZk X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGgguNQ+PmgQVEgHdCC2FdrNHTusB4SH0YUBq4fzrALOkcJ5A6OlLQACGre8/CZZhcMd7mBvA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d506:b0:205:7863:2dec with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-20b3729c7b2mr58096525ad.27.1727453972895; Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:19:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from server.roeck-us.net ([2600:1700:e321:62f0:329c:23ff:fee3:9d7c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-20b37e35ce7sm15258055ad.209.2024.09.27.09.19.30 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:19:31 -0700 (PDT) Sender: Guenter Roeck Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 09:19:30 -0700 From: Guenter Roeck To: Stephen Boyd Cc: Michael Turquette , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Brendan Higgins , David Gow , Rae Moar , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J . Wysocki" , Rob Herring , Saravana Kannan , Daniel Latypov , Christian Marangi , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Maxime Ripard , Geert Uytterhoeven Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 8/8] clk: Add KUnit tests for clks registered with struct clk_parent_data Message-ID: References: <20240718210513.3801024-1-sboyd@kernel.org> <20240718210513.3801024-9-sboyd@kernel.org> <6cd337fb-38f0-41cb-b942-5844b84433db@roeck-us.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Copying devicetree maintainers. On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 09:39:38PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > On Thu, Sep 26, 2024 at 09:14:11PM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: > > Hi Stephen, > > > > On Thu, Jul 18, 2024 at 02:05:07PM -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote: > > > Test that clks registered with 'struct clk_parent_data' work as > > > intended and can find their parents. > > > > > > > When testing this on arm64, I see the error below. The error is only > > seen if I boot through efi, i.e., with "-bios QEMU_EFI-aarch64.fd" > > qemu parameter. > > > > Any idea what might cause the problem ? > > > I noticed that the new overlay tests fail as well, also with "path '/' not > found". > > [Maybe] answering my own question: I think the problem may be that there > is no devicetree file and thus no devicetree root when booting through > efi (in other words, of_root is NULL). Would it make sense to skip the > tests in that case ? > The problem is that of_root is not initialized in arm64 boots if ACPI is enabled. >From arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c:setup_arch(): if (acpi_disabled) unflatten_device_tree(); // initializes of_root ACPI is enabled if the system boots from EFI. This also affects CONFIG_OF_KUNIT_TEST, which explicitly checks if of_root exists and fails the test if it doesn't. I think those tests need to add a check for this condition, or affected machines won't be able to run those unit tests. The obvious solution would be to check if of_root is set, but then the associated test case in CONFIG_OF_KUNIT_TEST would not make sense. Any suggestions ? Thanks, Guenter