Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] software node: provide support for fw_devlink

[Bartosz Golaszewski]

On Mon, 13 Jul 2026 11:45:17 +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
> On Sun, 12 Jul 2026 18:59:04 +0200, Danilo Krummrich <dakr@xxxxxxxxxx> said:
>> On Fri Jul 10, 2026 at 3:51 PM CEST, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>>
>>  static struct kunit_case swnode_test_cases[] = {
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-kunit.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-kunit.c
>> index ad961cf97aee..7798f8a8e602 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-kunit.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-kunit.c
>> @@ -449,6 +449,9 @@ static void gpio_swnode_probe_defer_on_unregistered(struct kunit *test)
>>
>>         pdata = dev_get_platdata(&cons->dev);
>>         KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, pdata->gpio_err, 0);
>> +
>> +       /* Tear down the consumer before the provider to free the GPIO. */
>> +       kunit_platform_device_unregister(test, cons);
>>  }
>>
>>  static int gpio_swnode_probe_order_test_init(struct kunit *test)
>> @@ -614,9 +617,17 @@ static struct kunit_case gpio_unbind_with_consumers_tests[] = {
>>         { }
>>  };
>>
>> +static int gpio_unbind_test_init(struct kunit *test)
>> +{
>> +       device_link_wait_removal();
>
> Interestingly I noticed this in the GPIO test cases but not here...
>
> I also think that we should call device_link_wait_removal() *before* and
> *after* these cases to not affect other test suites - as pointed out by
> sashiko too.
>

Huh, that won't work because suite->exit() runs *before* kunit_cleanup(). Isn't
it wrong? We do suite->init(), then schedule actions inside the test, it would
make sense to then first call the release callbacks for resources and only
after that call suite->exit()?

Anyway, that's material for another series.

Bart