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

[Graeme Russ <graeme.russ@gmail.com>]

Hi Simon,

On 27/08/11 10:25, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Mike,
> 
> On Fri, Aug 26, 2011 at 1:55 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On Thursday, August 25, 2011 23:32:38 Simon Glass wrote:

[snip]

>>> - 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
> 
> Because then you need to set up a real tftp server. It's fine to do
> what you suggest, but if possible it would be nice to have
> self-contained tests also, so long as it isn't too much work.
> 

I don't consider having to set up a tftp server as a bad thing - Quite the
opposite really. There is plenty of network code in U-Boot that will
benefit from testing under the sandbox target because it is much easier to
debug. And there will be minimal impact on U-Boot code (just a sandbox
'Ethernet' driver is all that will be needed)

I am reminded of when the R&D department that developed to eNET board were
doing the firmware development before the first prototypes were available -
The created a HAL which used pcap from memory. I wasn't part of that team,
so I really don't know the details...

Regards,

Graeme