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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] of: unittest: overlay: ensure proper alignment of
 copied FDT
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>
Cc:     Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@glider.be>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20210408204508.2276230-1-frowand.list@gmail.com>
 <CAL_Jsq+Os6O6CpRYurmf_4-Xnzgpkd1jbDbnp0en1TPbZXTf7w@mail.gmail.com>
 <b73965c7-e975-6c48-3367-411f6c754181@roeck-us.net>
From:   Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c625202a-0530-adbd-d4f8-0935d3ed37e2@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Apr 2021 17:53:10 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/68.10.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <b73965c7-e975-6c48-3367-411f6c754181@roeck-us.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 4/8/21 4:54 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 4/8/21 2:28 PM, Rob Herring wrote:
>>
>> Applying now so this gets into linux-next this week.
>>
> The patch doesn't apply on top of today's -next; it conflicts
> with "of: properly check for error returned by fdt_get_name()".
> 
> I reverted that patch and applied this one, and the DT unittests
> run with it on openrisc. I do get a single test failure, but I that
> is a different problem (possibly with the test case itself).
> 
> ### dt-test ### FAIL of_unittest_dma_ranges_one():923 of_dma_get_range: wrong DMA addr 0x00000000
> 	(expecting 100000000) on node /testcase-data/address-tests/bus@80000000/device@1000

That is a known regression on the target that I use for testing (and
has been since 5.10-rc1) - the 8074 dragonboard, arm 32.  No
one else has reported it on the list, so even though I want to debug
and fix it "promptly", other tasks have had higher priority.  In my
notes I list two suspect commits:

  e0d072782c73 dma-mapping: introduce DMA range map, supplanting dma_pfn_offset
  0a0f0d8be76d dma-mapping: split <linux/dma-mapping.h>

I think that was purely based on looking at the list of commits that
may have touched OF dma.  I have not done a bisect.

One specific report of not seeing the FAIL was Vireshk on 5.11-rc6 with
a Hikey board.

> 
> Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>

Thanks for testing!

> 
> Guenter
>