Hi
On 9/18/21 11:48 AM, Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
Hi Tom,
On Fri, 17 Sept 2021 at 15:08, Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com wrote:
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 11:49:51AM +0000, T Karthik Reddy wrote:
Hi Tom,
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com Sent: Thursday, August 5, 2021 6:53 PM To: T Karthik Reddy tkarthik@xilinx.com Cc: Ashok Reddy Soma ashokred@xilinx.com; u-boot@lists.denx.de; miquel.raynal@bootlin.com; git git@xilinx.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] test/py: tpm2: Skip tpm pytest based on env variable
On Thu, Aug 05, 2021 at 05:56:50AM +0000, T Karthik Reddy wrote:
Hello Tom Rini,
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Rini trini@konsulko.com Sent: Wednesday, August 4, 2021 8:52 PM To: Ashok Reddy Soma ashokred@xilinx.com Cc: u-boot@lists.denx.de; miquel.raynal@bootlin.com; git git@xilinx.com; T Karthik Reddy tkarthik@xilinx.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] test/py: tpm2: Skip tpm pytest based on env variable
On Fri, Jul 23, 2021 at 06:18:26AM -0600, Ashok Reddy Soma wrote:
> From: T Karthik Reddy t.karthik.reddy@xilinx.com > > Tpm test cases relies on tpm device setup. Provide an environment > variable "env__tpm_device_test_skip = True" to skip the test case > if tpm device is not present. > Only needed will have to add variable to the py-test framework. > Test runs successfully even this variable is absent. > > Signed-off-by: T Karthik Reddy t.karthik.reddy@xilinx.com > Signed-off-by: Ashok Reddy Soma ashok.reddy.soma@xilinx.com
Why is this not using boardenv_* like other tests do to disable running?
What I meant here was this test doesn't depend on configuration value from boardenv_*. But it uses env__tpm_device_test_skip variable from
the configuration file.
I referred test/py/tests/test_sleep.py for writing this test case, hence
copied comments as well.
Should I change this NOTE in comment section?
Thanks for explaining. This got me to re-read the existing tests and while none of it is as clear as I would like, your example here is just as clear as the rest, so it's fine and I'll pick it up soon.
I see this patch is not yet applied on the repo, could you please let me know when this will be applied?
Ilias, since you've said you'd review TPM related patches, does this: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/patch/1624340962-91190-1-git-send... work for you? Thanks.
I am not too familiar with the pytest framework we have, but couldn't we do this automatically? IOW instead of explicitly adding a variable, do a 'tpm info' and if that doesn't return a valid device, skip the tests.
Unfortunately not. Because imagine how this will work if you have tpm on board but there is bug in the driver that it is not probed. Then tpm info will return no device and all tests will be silently skipped.
It would be much better it the test itself was designed from the beginning that you need to state that board has TPM. But it wasn't that's why we designed this patch in a way that you declare that you want to skip these tests which is OK.
It doesn't make any sense to go back and start to have multiple defconfigs for different configurations where all boards works quite well with one defconfig. That's why we enable TPM because it on SOM but we need to be able to disable these tests on others.
Thanks, Michal