Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.35 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.35;
Date:   Fri, 8 Dec 2023 10:45:46 -0300
From:   =?utf-8?B?TsOtY29sYXMgRi4gUi4gQS4=?= Prado 
        <nfraprado@collabora.com>
To:     Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@gmail.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>, kernelci@lists.linux.dev,
        kernel@collabora.com, Guenter Roeck <groeck@chromium.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>,
        devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] kselftest: Add new test for detecting unprobed
 Devicetree devices
Message-ID: <e9772963-56e8-4465-9c29-3a2955b6f546@notapiano>
References: <20230828211424.2964562-1-nfraprado@collabora.com>
 <20230828211424.2964562-4-nfraprado@collabora.com>
 <310391e8-fdf2-4c2f-a680-7744eb685177@sirena.org.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <310391e8-fdf2-4c2f-a680-7744eb685177@sirena.org.uk>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Dec 07, 2023 at 08:18:49PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 28, 2023 at 05:13:12PM -0400, N?colas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
> > Introduce a new kselftest to detect devices that were declared in the
> > Devicetree, and are expected to be probed by a driver, but weren't.
> 
> I've been running this in my personal CI for a little while now and I'm
> finding it's pretty marginal for the 45 second default timeout in
> kselftest on some platforms, especially BeagleBone Black though it's not
> just that.  BBB is both slow and has a comprehensive DT which won't help
> matters, there's 253 devices.
> 
> I'm running it from nfsroot which is going to be part of the problem but
> shouldn't be too bad since we're mainly dealing with proc and sysfs and
> hopefully mostly running cached binaries, I'm also using a serial
> console to get the output which is going to add overhead especially with
> a large number odevices with length names.  I'm not sure what the best
> solution is here - a quick glance at the code doesn't ring any alarm
> bells for me, this may just be a reasonable runtime for the test.

Thanks for reporting this. I've experimented a bit and was able to find an
effective optimization and CC'ed it to you [1]. Hopefully it is as effective for
your board and setup as it is for mine. Let me know there.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231208133955.483851-1-nfraprado@collabora.com

Thanks,
N?colas