[PATCH v3 12/70] dm: part: Update test to use mmc2

[Simon Glass]

Hi Tom,

On Mon, 23 Jan 2023 at 18:39, Tom Rini <trini at konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 10:47:22AM -0700, Simon Glass wrote:
>
> > At present this test sets up a partition table on mmc1. But this is used
> > by the bootstd tests, so it is not possible to run those after this test
> > has run, without restarting the Python test harness.
> >
> > This is inconvenient when running tests repeatedly with 'ut dm'. Move the
> > test to use mmc2, which is not used by anything.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <sjg at chromium.org>
>
> When I run tests like this:
> TEST="not sleep and not event_dump and not bootmgr and not extension"
> ./tools/buildman/buildman -o /tmp/sandbox -P --board sandbox
> ./test/py/test.py --bd $ARGS --build-dir /tmp/sandbox -k "$TEST" -ra
> I get:
> ========================================== FAILURES ===========================================
> _________________________________ test_ut[ut_dm_dm_test_part] _________________________________
> test/py/tests/test_ut.py:341: in test_ut
>     assert output.endswith('Failures: 0')
> E   assert False
> E    +  where False = <built-in method endswith of str object at 0x2776470>('Failures: 0')
> E    +    where <built-in method endswith of str object at 0x2776470> = 'Test: dm_test_part: part.c\r\r\n** No device specified **\r\r\nCouldn\'t find partition mmc <NULL>\r\r\n** No device ...: 0 == do_test(uts, 2, "1:2", 0): Expected 0x0 (0), got 0x1 (1)\r\r\nTest dm_test_part failed 4 times\r\r\nFailures: 4'.endswith
> ------------------------------------ Captured stdout call -------------------------------------
> => ut dm dm_test_part
> Test: dm_test_part: part.c
> ** No device specified **
> Couldn't find partition mmc <NULL>
> ** No device specified **
> Couldn't find partition mmc
> ** No partition table - mmc 0 **
> Couldn't find partition mmc 0
> Could not find "test1" partition
> ** Bad device specification mmc #test1 **
> ** Bad device specification mmc #test1 **
> Couldn't find partition mmc #test1
> ** Bad partition specification mmc 1:0 **
> Couldn't find partition mmc 1:0
> ** Invalid partition 2 **
> Couldn't find partition mmc 1:2
> test/dm/part.c:20, do_test(): expected == part_get_info_by_dev_and_name_or_num("mmc", part_str, &mmc_dev_desc, &part_info, whole): Expected 0x2 (2), got 0xfffffffe (-2)
> test/dm/part.c:82, dm_test_part(): 0 == do_test(uts, 2, "1:2", 0): Expected 0x0 (0), got 0x1 (1)
> Test: dm_test_part: part.c (flat tree)
> ** No device specified **
> Couldn't find partition mmc <NULL>
> ** No device specified **
> Couldn't find partition mmc
> ** No partition table - mmc 0 **
> Couldn't find partition mmc 0
> Could not find "test1" partition
> ** Bad device specification mmc #test1 **
> ** Bad device specification mmc #test1 **
> Couldn't find partition mmc #test1
> ** Bad partition specification mmc 1:0 **
> Couldn't find partition mmc 1:0
> ** Invalid partition 2 **
> Couldn't find partition mmc 1:2
> test/dm/part.c:20, do_test(): expected == part_get_info_by_dev_and_name_or_num("mmc", part_str, &mmc_dev_desc, &part_info, whole): Expected 0x2 (2), got 0xfffffffe (-2)
> test/dm/part.c:82, dm_test_part(): 0 == do_test(uts, 2, "1:2", 0): Expected 0x0 (0), got 0x1 (1)
> Test dm_test_part failed 4 times
> Failures: 4
> =>

Oh dear. I believe this is an ordering problem. These two patches need
to be applied together because the first one changes mmc1.img and the
second one relies on that change:

part: Add a function to find the first bootable partition
dm: part: Update test to use mmc2

I have them quite far apart in the series.

I can merge them into one commit, perhaps?

>
> And further tests down the series also fail / introduce failures, but
> this is the first one, and why I thought v2 had more problems.

For some reason I'm not seeing this, but it could be another ordering
thing. I don't see failures on CI but it only tests the whole.

Let me know what you'd like me to do. I don't currently have a way to
run tests on every commit, so my testing there is a bit random. I
normally just build-test the series and then check with CI.

Regards,
Simon