MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230302013822.1808711-1-sboyd@kernel.org> <20230302013822.1808711-2-sboyd@kernel.org>
 <CABVgOSkxOxpaHVtq1YpvNEshTZ3nic1p7NjV5DPdz066=tiS-A@mail.gmail.com> <377046f369227a11fbf9e67c3c122d79.sboyd@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <377046f369227a11fbf9e67c3c122d79.sboyd@kernel.org>
From:   David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 10 Mar 2023 15:55:09 +0800
Message-ID: <CABVgOSm_yRjqKYegZeFkObkS9cgXaDfD2CTeoE1s7RRLo=RuEg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] dt-bindings: Add linux,kunit binding
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org>
Cc:     Michael Turquette <mturquette@baylibre.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-clk@vger.kernel.org,
        patches@lists.linux.dev,
        Brendan Higgins <brendan.higgins@linux.dev>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>,
        Anton Ivanov <anton.ivanov@cambridgegreys.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
        Vincent Whitchurch <vincent.whitchurch@axis.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        Christian Marangi <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-um@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, kunit-dev@googlegroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, 10 Mar 2023 at 07:12, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Quoting David Gow (2023-03-02 23:14:55)
> > On Thu, 2 Mar 2023 at 09:38, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > Document the linux,kunit board compatible string. This board is loaded
> > > into the Linux kernel when KUnit is testing devicetree dependent code.
> >
> > As with the series as a whole, this might need to change a little bit
> > if we want to either use devicetree overlays and/or other
> > architectures.
> >
> > That being said, I'm okay with having this until then: the only real
> > topic for bikeshedding is the name.
> > - Is KUnit best as a board name, or part of the vendor name?
> > - Do we want to include the architecture in the name?
> > Should it be "linux,kunit", "linux-kunit,uml", "linux,kunit-uml", etc?
>
> I think I will drop this patch. I have overlays working. I hijacked
> of_core_init() to load the testcase data from drivers/of/unittest-data
> and made a container node for kunit overlays to apply to.

Makes sense to me, thanks!

Looking forward to seeing how the overlays work in practice!