Re: [PATCH v2 12/29] fs: Disable sandbox filesystem in SPL

Sean Anderson
2023-10-15T07:08:25Z

On 10/14/23 17:14, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>
>
> Am 14. Oktober 2023 22:47:48 MESZ schrieb Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com>:
> >Don't bother compiling the sandbox filesystem in SPL for now, as it is not
> >needed.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <seanga2@gmail.com>
> >---
> >
> >Changes in v2:
> >- Disable sandbox filesystem in SPL instead of compiling it in
> >
> > fs/fs.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/fs/fs.c b/fs/fs.c
> >index cfc781bbb8d..4cb4310c9cc 100644
> >--- a/fs/fs.c
> >+++ b/fs/fs.c
> >@@ -237,7 +237,7 @@ static struct fstype_info fstypes[] = {
> > .mkdir = fs_mkdir_unsupported,
> > },
> > #endif
> >-#ifdef CONFIG_SANDBOX
> >+#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SANDBOX) && !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SPL_BUILD)
>
> Why do would you disable the sandbox file system in SPL for CONFIG_SANDBOX_SPL=y?

It was never enabled in the first place, since we never had fs.c compiled in SPL
before. This just fixes linking.

> I cannot see that this is necessary to enable the unit tests you are striving for. Instead we should extend the SPL unit tests to sandbox_spl_defconfig in the long run.

The purpose of the sandbox filesystem is to test routines which use the filesystem
API in U-Boot. However, there are very few which do so in SPL. SPL_FS_LOADER is the
only one I know of off the top of my head. However, FS_LOADER is tested in U-Boot
proper. I don't think there is a pressing need to enable the sandbox filesystem in SPL.

--Sean