Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Thu, 21 Jan 2021 11:13:40 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
To:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>
Cc:     David Gibson <david@gibson.dropbear.id.au>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@linaro.org>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Bill Mills <bill.mills@linaro.org>, anmar.oueja@linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 5/5] of: unittest: Statically apply overlays using
 fdtoverlay
Message-ID: <20210121054340.e4do45uvdns5bl5f@vireshk-i7>
References: <cover.1611124778.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <696c137461be8ec4395c733c559c269bb4ad586e.1611124778.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org>
 <20210121005145.GF5174@yekko.fritz.box>
 <7d6adfd9-da1e-d4ca-3a04-b192f0cf36b0@gmail.com>
 <a6b5e6ac-90ec-9571-4fce-de7344bfcee9@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <a6b5e6ac-90ec-9571-4fce-de7344bfcee9@gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180716-391-311a52
Precedence: bulk

Hi Frank,

On 20-01-21, 23:34, Frank Rowand wrote:
> It should be possible to apply this same concept to copying overlay_base.dts
> to overlay_base_base.dts, removing the "/plugin/;" from overlay_base_base.dts
> and using an additional rule to use fdtoverlay to apply overlay.dtb on top
> of overlay_base_base.dtb.

Are you suggesting to then merge this with testcases.dtb to get
static_test.dtb or keep two output files (static_test.dtb from
testcases.dtb + overlays and static_test2.dtb from overlay_base.dtb
and overlay.dtb) ?

Asking because as I mentioned earlier, overlay_base.dtb doesn't have
__overlay__ property for its nodes and we can't apply that to
testcases.dtb using fdtoverlay.

> Yes, overlay_base_base is a terrible name.  Just used to illustrate the point.
> 
> I tried this by hand and am failing miserably.  But I am not using the proper
> environment (just a quick hack to see if the method might work).  So I would
> have to set things up properly to really test this.
> 
> If this does work, it would remove my objections to you trying to transform
> the existing unittest .dts test data files (because you would not have to
> actually modify the existing .dts files).

-- 
viresh