[U-Boot] [PATCH] dm: core: Fix regression caused by c1d6f91

[Simon Glass]

Hi Joe,

On 29 April 2015 at 10:17, Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 8:30 AM, Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org> wrote:
>> Hi Joe,
>>
>> On 28 April 2015 at 22:14, Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger at ni.com> wrote:
>>> The change to refactor these functions created a regression.
>>>
>>> commit c1d6f91952d0761f61b0f0f96e4c7aa32eee2788
>>> Author: Przemyslaw Marczak <p.marczak at samsung.com>
>>> Date:   Wed Apr 15 13:07:17 2015 +0200
>>> dm: core: add internal functions for getting the device without probe
>>>
>>> With this change, the dm unit tests started failing with a probe error
>>> -22 in the dm_test_children test.
>>>
>>> Test: dm_test_children
>>> test/dm/core.c:544, dm_test_children(): 0 == ret: Expected 0, got -22
>>>
>>> This restores the original behavior which would avoid a probe on invalid
>>> device pointers.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Joe Hershberger <joe.hershberger at ni.com>
>>> ---
>>>
>>>  drivers/core/uclass.c | 8 ++++++--
>>>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> Can you please check this - it is very similar to yours:
>>
>> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/464459/
>
> Yes, it looks like it solves the same problem. I don't care which way
> it gets solved. Looks like yours is already on the way in. Hopefully
> sooner than later.
>
> At what point will we make the tests be a gating factor for pulling
> patches, kinda like checkpatch.pl?

Not sure, we don't even check that things build at present....

Now that the tests are running again, I'll resume checking driver
model things before pulling things in.

But we could use a way to run all tests, and some unification of them
(e.g. all run with the same U-Boot build).

Regards,
Simon