[U-Boot] RFC: Testing U-Boot Part 1

[Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>]

On Thursday, August 25, 2011 23:32:38 Simon Glass wrote:
> 1. What should I call the architecture? I have so far called it 'native'.
> 2. What should I call the vendor (board/xxx)? 'test' or 'sandbox'?
> 3. What should I call the board? Is that 'sandbox'?

as Graeme said, just call them all "sandbox"

> 4. When I create a driver, like the serial test driver, should that be
> serial_test.c, test_serial.c, sandbox_serial or something else?

i think it depends on its function.  if the serial driver actually goes to 
std{in,err,out}, then perhaps "serial/sandbox_stdio.c".  let's not assume 
we'll only ever have one pseudo driver that we can use under the sandbox :).

> Wolfgang Denk: I'm not sure what you mean by "a mocked remote host".
> We should be
> able to send and receive packets from a real network interface as
> well.
> 
> - I mean that the tftp command will 'obtain' a file when it asks for
> one, although the actual Ethernet layer is mocked and doesn't actually
> go out on the wire. Imagine an Ethernet driver which has a half-baked
> tftp server in it. Yes I also see value in actually using machine
> interfaces since the testing can be more thorough.

why not just build on top of tun/tap ?  then we do get "real" network traffic, 
and you dont have to write your own tftp server because you can simply use the 
same exact one on your development machine that the board would connect to.
-mike
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.denx.de/pipermail/u-boot/attachments/20110826/6fb86d74/attachment.pgp