> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2023 8:13 AM
> To: Slater, Joseph <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]; MacLeod, Randy
> <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [v3][meta-oe][PATCH 1/1] libgpiod: modify test 'gpioset: toggle
> (continuous)'
> 
> On Wed, Jun 14, 2023 at 4:06 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > From: Joe Slater <[email protected]>
> >
> > Look for level transitions when testing toggling values because using
> > fixed delays to assume value changes is not reliable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Joe Slater <[email protected]>
> > ---
> >  .../gpio-tools-test-bats-modify.patch         | 67 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  .../libgpiod/libgpiod_2.0.1.bb                |  2 +
> >  2 files changed, 69 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644
> > meta-oe/recipes-support/libgpiod/libgpiod-2.x/gpio-tools-test-bats-mod
> > ify.patch
> >
> > diff --git
> > a/meta-oe/recipes-support/libgpiod/libgpiod-2.x/gpio-tools-test-bats-m
> > odify.patch
> > b/meta-oe/recipes-support/libgpiod/libgpiod-2.x/gpio-tools-test-bats-m
> > odify.patch
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..4d49467968
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-support/libgpiod/libgpiod-2.x/gpio-tools-test-ba
> > +++ ts-modify.patch
> > @@ -0,0 +1,67 @@
> > +From 53f9670d6af1bd0745c1df9c469b269c72607b23 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00
> > +2001
> > +From: Joe Slater <[email protected]>
> > +Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2023 08:04:27 -0700
> > +Subject: [PATCH] tools: tests: modify delays in toggle test
> > +
> > +The test "gpioset: toggle (continuous)" uses fixed delays to test
> > +toggling values. This is not reliable, so we switch to looking for
> > +transitions from one value to another.
> > +
> > +We wait for a transition up to 1.5 seconds.
> > +
> > +Signed-off-by: Joe Slater <[email protected]>
> > +Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]>
> > +
> > +Upstream-status: accepted
> > +
> > +Signed-off-by: Joe Slater <[email protected]>
> > +---
> > + tools/gpio-tools-test.bats | 21 ++++++++++++++++-----
> > + 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > +
> > +diff --git a/tools/gpio-tools-test.bats b/tools/gpio-tools-test.bats
> > +index c83ca7d..929c35a 100755
> > +--- a/tools/gpio-tools-test.bats
> > ++++ b/tools/gpio-tools-test.bats
> > +@@ -141,6 +141,20 @@ gpiosim_check_value() {
> > +       [ "$VAL" = "$EXPECTED" ]
> > + }
> > +
> > ++gpiosim_wait_value() {
> > ++      local OFFSET=$2
> > ++      local EXPECTED=$3
> > ++      local DEVNAME=${GPIOSIM_DEV_NAME[$1]}
> > ++      local CHIPNAME=${GPIOSIM_CHIP_NAME[$1]}
> > ++      local
> > ++PORT=$GPIOSIM_SYSFS/$DEVNAME/$CHIPNAME/sim_gpio$OFFSET/value
> > ++
> > ++      for i in {1..15}; do
> > ++              [ "$(<$PORT)" = "$EXPECTED" ] && return
> > ++              sleep 0.1
> > ++      done
> > ++      return 1
> > ++}
> > ++
> > + gpiosim_cleanup() {
> > +       for CHIP in ${!GPIOSIM_CHIP_NAME[@]}
> > +       do
> > +@@ -1567,15 +1581,12 @@ request_release_line() {
> > +       gpiosim_check_value sim0 4 0
> > +       gpiosim_check_value sim0 7 0
> > +
> > +-      sleep 1
> > +-
> > +-      gpiosim_check_value sim0 1 0
> > ++      gpiosim_wait_value sim0 1 0
> > +       gpiosim_check_value sim0 4 1
> > +       gpiosim_check_value sim0 7 1
> > +
> > +-      sleep 1
> > +
> > +-      gpiosim_check_value sim0 1 1
> > ++      gpiosim_wait_value sim0 1 1
> > +       gpiosim_check_value sim0 4 0
> > +       gpiosim_check_value sim0 7 0
> > + }
> > +--
> > +2.25.1
> > +
> > diff --git a/meta-oe/recipes-support/libgpiod/libgpiod_2.0.1.bb
> > b/meta-oe/recipes-support/libgpiod/libgpiod_2.0.1.bb
> > index 337554cd89..6958f2d841 100644
> > --- a/meta-oe/recipes-support/libgpiod/libgpiod_2.0.1.bb
> > +++ b/meta-oe/recipes-support/libgpiod/libgpiod_2.0.1.bb
> > @@ -9,6 +9,8 @@ LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = " \
> >
> >  FILESEXTRAPATHS:prepend := "${THISDIR}/${PN}-2.x:"
> >
> > +SRC_URI += "file://gpio-tools-test-bats-modify.patch"
> > +
> >  SRC_URI[sha256sum] =
> "b5367d28d045b36007a4ffd42cceda4c358737ef4f2ce22b0c1d05ec57a38392"
> >
> >  # Enable all project features for ptest
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >
> Reluctant:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <[email protected]>
> 
> Although, I'm asking myself - why do you need this? Have you seen any failures
> with ptest? Can this wait for a full release?

[Slater, Joseph] 
Yes, we have seen failures.  It is not my call as to when they need to be 
fixed.  I can understand meta-oe wanting to wait for a release.  If that is the 
case, I'll have to see what people want to do locally as a temporary fix.

Joe

> 
> Bart
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#103287): 
https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-devel/message/103287
Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/99528223/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-devel/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to