[PATCH v2 3/3] cyclic: make clients embed a struct cyclic_info in their own data structure

[Stefan Roese]

On 5/21/24 10:38, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 21/05/2024 08.57, Stefan Roese wrote:
>> On 5/19/24 21:44, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
>>> On 18/05/2024 09.34, Stefan Roese wrote:
>>>
>>>> This introduces some problems when compiling e.g. sandbox:
>>>>
>>>> In file included from test/common/cyclic.c:10:
>>>> test/common/cyclic.c: In function ‘dm_test_cyclic_running’:
>>>> test/common/cyclic.c:25:42: warning: passing argument 1 of
>>>> ‘cyclic_register’ from incompatible pointer type
>>>> [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
>>>>      25 |         ut_assertnonnull(cyclic_register(cyclic_test, 10 *
>>>> 1000,
>>>> "cyclic_demo",
>>>>         |                                          ^~~~~~~~~~~
>>>>         |                                          |
>>>>         |                                          void (*)(void *)
>>>> include/test/ut.h:298:29: note: in definition of macro
>>>> ‘ut_assertnonnull’
>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> Could you please also change the test file accordingly? I'll then
>>>> try to get this upstream shortly.
>>>
>>> Whoops, I don't know how I managed to miss that when grepping for users.
>>> Sorry about that. Updated version coming shortly.
>>
>> Thanks. Still the new version also fails in the CI build. I'm using
>> MS Azure for this, here the link to the failing build:
>>
>> https://dev.azure.com/sr0718/u-boot/_build/results?buildId=355&view=results
> 
> Apparently I'm blind, the full definition of 'struct cyclic_info' was
> not guarded by CONFIG_CYCLIC.

Yes, I already "played" a bit here but still got other problems.

>> Could you please make sure that CI fully builds?
> 
> Is there a way I can trigger that from my side without sending patches?

You need to have an azure account and push a branch with your patches
into your u-boot repo to trigger the CI build. Gitlab also is possible
AFAIK.

>> BTW: Not sure if I still can pull this (updated version) in, since I'm
>> leaving for a 2 week vacation tomorrow morning.
> 
> NP, I should have been more careful. I'll send an updated version in a
> moment anyway.

Thanks,
Stefan