Hi Jean-Jacques,
On Tue, 5 Nov 2019 at 04:50, Jean-Jacques Hiblot jjhiblot@ti.com wrote:
Provide tests to check the behavior of the multiplexer framework. The test uses a mmio-based multiplexer.
Signed-off-by: Jean-Jacques Hiblot jjhiblot@ti.com
Changes in v2:
- Call sandbox_set_enable_memio(true) before running the test
arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts | 26 +++++++ configs/sandbox_defconfig | 2 + test/dm/Makefile | 1 + test/dm/mux-mmio.c | 147 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 4 files changed, 176 insertions(+) create mode 100644 test/dm/mux-mmio.c
Reviewed-by: Simon Glass sjg@chromium.org
nits below
diff --git a/arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts b/arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts index aa9eaec338..3224a8389c 100644 --- a/arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts +++ b/arch/sandbox/dts/test.dts @@ -1,3 +1,5 @@ +#include <dt-bindings/mux/mux.h>
/dts-v1/;
/ { @@ -93,6 +95,11 @@ <&gpio_b 9 0xc 3 2 1>; int-value = <1234>; uint-value = <(-1234)>;
mux-controls = <&muxcontroller0 0>, <&muxcontroller0 1>,<&muxcontroller0 2>, <&muxcontroller0 3>;mux-control-names = "mux0", "mux1", "mux2", "mux3";mux-syscon = <&syscon3>; }; junk {@@ -129,6 +136,9 @@ compatible = "denx,u-boot-fdt-test"; ping-expect = <3>; ping-add = <3>;
mux-controls = <&muxcontroller0 0>;mux-control-names = "mux0"; }; phy_provider0: gen_phy@0 {@@ -665,6 +675,22 @@ 0x58 8>; };
syscon3: syscon@3 {compatible = "simple-mfd", "syscon";reg = <0x000100 0x10>;muxcontroller0: a-mux-controller {compatible = "mmio-mux";#mux-control-cells = <1>;mux-reg-masks = <0x0 0x30>, /* 0: reg 0x0, bits 5:4 */<0x3 0x1E>, /* 1: reg 0x3, bits 4:1 */<0x1 0xFF>; /* 2: reg 0x1, bits 7:0 */idle-states = <MUX_IDLE_AS_IS>, <0x02>, <0x73>;u-boot,mux-autoprobe;};};timer { compatible = "sandbox,timer"; clock-frequency = <1000000>;diff --git a/configs/sandbox_defconfig b/configs/sandbox_defconfig index 20ebc68997..2822dd9c74 100644 --- a/configs/sandbox_defconfig +++ b/configs/sandbox_defconfig @@ -144,6 +144,8 @@ CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_SPANSION=y CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_STMICRO=y CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_SST=y CONFIG_SPI_FLASH_WINBOND=y +CONFIG_MULTIPLEXER=y +CONFIG_MUX_MMIO=y CONFIG_DM_ETH=y CONFIG_NVME=y CONFIG_PCI=y diff --git a/test/dm/Makefile b/test/dm/Makefile index 0c2fd5cb5e..a3fc23e527 100644 --- a/test/dm/Makefile +++ b/test/dm/Makefile @@ -47,6 +47,7 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_DM_SPI_FLASH) += sf.o obj-$(CONFIG_SMEM) += smem.o obj-$(CONFIG_DM_SPI) += spi.o obj-y += syscon.o +obj-$(CONFIG_MUX_MMIO) += mux-mmio.o obj-$(CONFIG_DM_USB) += usb.o obj-$(CONFIG_DM_PMIC) += pmic.o obj-$(CONFIG_DM_REGULATOR) += regulator.o diff --git a/test/dm/mux-mmio.c b/test/dm/mux-mmio.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000000..a3dfd34120 --- /dev/null +++ b/test/dm/mux-mmio.c @@ -0,0 +1,147 @@ +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0+ +/*
- Copyright (C) 2017-2018 Texas Instruments Incorporated - http://www.ti.com/
- Jean-Jacques Hiblot jjhiblot@ti.com
- */
+#include <common.h> +#include <fdtdec.h> +#include <dm.h> +#include <mux.h> +#include <regmap.h> +#include <syscon.h> +#include <asm/test.h> +#include <dm/root.h> +#include <dm/test.h> +#include <dm/util.h> +#include <test/ut.h>
Missing header file for device_remove() here.
+/* Test that mmio mux work correctly */ +static int dm_test_mux_mmio(struct unit_test_state *uts) +{
struct udevice *dev, *dev_b;struct regmap *map;struct mux_control *ctl0_a, *ctl0_b;struct mux_control *ctl1;struct mux_control *ctl_err;u32 val;int i;sandbox_set_enable_memio(true);ut_assertok(uclass_get_device(UCLASS_TEST_FDT, 0, &dev));ut_assertok(uclass_get_device(UCLASS_TEST_FDT, 1, &dev_b));ut_asserteq_str("a-test", dev->name);ut_asserteq_str("b-test", dev_b->name);map = syscon_regmap_lookup_by_phandle(dev, "mux-syscon");ut_assert(!IS_ERR(map));ut_assert(map);/* check default states */ut_assertok(regmap_read(map, 3, &val));ut_asserteq(0x02, (val & 0x1E) >> 1);ut_assertok(regmap_read(map, 1, &val));ut_asserteq(0x73, (val & 0xFF) >> 0);ut_assertok(mux_control_get(dev, "mux0", &ctl0_a));ut_assertok(mux_control_get(dev, "mux1", &ctl1));ut_asserteq(-ERANGE, mux_control_get(dev, "mux3", &ctl_err));ut_asserteq(-ENODATA, mux_control_get(dev, "dummy", &ctl_err));ut_assertok(mux_control_get(dev_b, "mux0", &ctl0_b));for (i = 0; i < mux_control_states(ctl0_a); i++) {/* select a new state and verify the value in the regmap */ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_a, i));ut_assertok(regmap_read(map, 0, &val));ut_asserteq(i, (val & 0x30) >> 4);/** deselect the mux and verify that the value in the regmap* reflects the idle state (fixed to MUX_IDLE_AS_IS)*/ut_assertok(mux_control_deselect(ctl0_a));ut_assertok(regmap_read(map, 0, &val));ut_asserteq(i, (val & 0x30) >> 4);}
Tests should be short and targeted. Could this test be split up a bit>
for (i = 0; i < mux_control_states(ctl1); i++) {/* select a new state and verify the value in the regmap */ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl1, i));ut_assertok(regmap_read(map, 3, &val));ut_asserteq(i, (val & 0x1E) >> 1);/** deselect the mux and verify that the value in the regmap* reflects the idle state (fixed to 2)*/ut_assertok(mux_control_deselect(ctl1));ut_assertok(regmap_read(map, 3, &val));ut_asserteq(2, (val & 0x1E) >> 1);}// try unbalanced selection/deselectionut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 0));ut_asserteq(-EBUSY, mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 1));ut_asserteq(-EBUSY, mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 0));ut_assertok(mux_control_deselect(ctl0_a));// try concurent selection
concurrent
Please use C comment style.
ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 0));ut_assert(mux_control_select(ctl0_b, 0));ut_assertok(mux_control_deselect(ctl0_a));ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_b, 0));ut_assert(mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 0));ut_assertok(mux_control_deselect(ctl0_b));ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 0));ut_assertok(mux_control_deselect(ctl0_a));return 0;+} +DM_TEST(dm_test_mux_mmio, DM_TESTF_SCAN_PDATA | DM_TESTF_SCAN_FDT);
+/* Test that managed API for mux work correctly */ +static int dm_test_devm_mux_mmio(struct unit_test_state *uts) +{
struct udevice *dev, *dev_b;struct mux_control *ctl0_a, *ctl0_b;struct mux_control *ctl1;struct mux_control *ctl_err;sandbox_set_enable_memio(true);ut_assertok(uclass_get_device(UCLASS_TEST_FDT, 0, &dev));ut_assertok(uclass_get_device(UCLASS_TEST_FDT, 1, &dev_b));ut_asserteq_str("a-test", dev->name);ut_asserteq_str("b-test", dev_b->name);ctl0_a = devm_mux_control_get(dev, "mux0");ut_assertok(IS_ERR(ctl0_a));
Probably need to define ut_assert_not_err() or similar.
ut_assert(ctl0_a);ctl1 = devm_mux_control_get(dev, "mux1");ut_assertok(IS_ERR(ctl1));ut_assert(ctl1);ctl_err = devm_mux_control_get(dev, "mux3");ut_asserteq(-ERANGE, PTR_ERR(ctl_err));ctl_err = devm_mux_control_get(dev, "dummy");ut_asserteq(-ENODATA, PTR_ERR(ctl_err));ctl0_b = devm_mux_control_get(dev_b, "mux0");ut_assertok(IS_ERR(ctl0_b));ut_assert(ctl0_b);/* try concurent selection */
spelling again
ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 0));ut_assert(mux_control_select(ctl0_b, 0));ut_assertok(mux_control_deselect(ctl0_a));ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_b, 0));ut_assert(mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 0));ut_assertok(mux_control_deselect(ctl0_b));/* removed one device and check that the mux is released */ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_a, 0));ut_assert(mux_control_select(ctl0_b, 0));device_remove(dev, DM_REMOVE_NORMAL);ut_assertok(mux_control_select(ctl0_b, 0));device_remove(dev_b, DM_REMOVE_NORMAL);return 0;+}
+DM_TEST(dm_test_devm_mux_mmio, DM_TESTF_SCAN_PDATA | DM_TESTF_SCAN_FDT);
2.17.1
Regards, Simon