Re: [PATCH v4 06/16] of: unittest: changeset helpers

[Rob Herring]

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 5:39 PM, Laurent Pinchart
<laurent.pinchart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Rob,
>
> On Thursday, 22 February 2018 01:10:25 EET Rob Herring wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 5:10 PM, Laurent Pinchart wrote:
>> > From: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > Add a unitest specific for the new changeset helpers.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > Signed-off-by: Laurent Pinchart
>> > <laurent.pinchart+renesas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > ---
>> >
>> >  drivers/of/unittest.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/of/unittest.c b/drivers/of/unittest.c
>> > index 7a9abaae874d..1b21d2c549a8 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/of/unittest.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/of/unittest.c
>> > @@ -609,6 +609,59 @@ static void __init of_unittest_changeset(void)
>> >
>> >  #endif
>> >  }
>> >
>> > +static void __init of_unittest_changeset_helper(void)
>> > +{
>> > +#ifdef CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC
>>
>> I think this can be:
>>
>> if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC))
>>   return;
>
> Not quite, as there are functions used below (such as of_changeset_init())
> that are not defined if CONFIG_OF_DYNAMIC isn't enabled. We could create stubs
> in that case but I believe that's out of scope for this patch series.

Okay. I thought we had the necessary stubs, but didn't check too closely.

>
>> Otherwise,
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Rob Herring <robh@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
>