[U-Boot] [PATCH 1/2] test/py: move find_ram_base() into u_boot_utils

[Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>]

On 01/25/2016 06:03 PM, Simon Glass wrote:
> Hi Stephen,
>
> On 25 January 2016 at 09:50, Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org> wrote:
>> On 01/22/2016 03:30 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear Stephen,
>>>
>>> In message <1453417531-23669-1-git-send-email-swarren@wwwdotorg.org> you
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> find_ram_base() is a shared utility function, not a core part of the
>>>> U-Boot console interaction.
>>>
>>>
>>> On which boards did you test this feature?  Eventually ARM only?
>>
>>
>> It's been tested on a few ARM, sandbox, and at least one microblaze.
>>
>>>> +    with u_boot_console.log.section('find_ram_base'):
>>>> +        response = u_boot_console.run_command('bdinfo')
>>>> +        for l in response.split('\n'):
>>>> +            if '-> start' in l:
>>>> +                ram_base = int(l.split('=')[1].strip(), 16)
>>>> +                break
>>>
>>>
>>> Searching for "-> start" is probably not exactly portable.  For
>>> example, on a PowerPC system the output of "bdi" might look like this:
>>>
>>> => bdi
>>> memstart    = 0x00000000
>>> memsize     = 0x04000000
>>
>> ...
>>>
>>>
>>> [example is from a TQM5200S, U-Boot 2016.01-00223-gb57843e]
>>
>>
>> Good point. I think the best fix here is to modify all implementations of
>> "bdinfo" to print the same information and in the same format as much as
>> possible. Do you agree?
>
> Yes - and the best way to do this is to use the same code for all
> boards if possible.
>
> BTW I can't apply this patch as the u_boot_utils.py file is missing.
> Can you please rebase and resend?

Do you have "test/py: add various utility code" already applied? That 
creates u_boot_utils.py. As mentioned in the original patch email, this 
series depends on the series that contains that patch. You had replied 
earlier that you had applied that series in u-boot-dm.