On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 08:48:47AM -0400, Rob Clark wrote: > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:59 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 05:50:39PM -0400, Rob Clark wrote: > >> On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:13 PM, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > >> > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 06:45:20AM -0400, Rob Clark wrote: > >> > > >> >> Introduce directory traversal iterators, and implement fs_readdir() > >> >> which is needed by EFI_LOADER. > >> >> > >> >> The part re-working fat.c to use the directory iterators itself is > >> >> nearly a 2:1 negative diffstat, and a pretty big cleanup. I fixed > >> >> one or two other small issues along the way. It hasn't really been > >> >> tested with a wide variaty of different fat filesystems (if someone > >> >> has a collection of disk images to test with somewhere, let me know), > >> >> but it seems at least not worse than what it is replacing. > >> > > >> > Did you run test/fs/fs-test.sh and confirm there's at least no > >> > regressions? Thanks! > >> > >> I've been having trouble getting fs-test.sh to pass even without my > >> changes, so no.. > > > > Pass, or provide expected results? From the script, we expect: > > # Total Summary: TOTAL PASS: 132 TOTAL FAIL: 6 > > Ok, I was missing special case handling for the "partition is whole > disk" case (which I *guess* is only a sandbox thing?)..
FWIW, nope, I believe some atmel boards utilize whole disk as FAT, IIRC, from when I was trying to come up with a good default value for the ENV_IS_IN_FAT Kconfig options. [snip] > fixed (and excluding the ext4 tests which have unrelated problems on > my setup): > > Total Summary: TOTAL PASS: 63 TOTAL FAIL: 6 > > So if the 6 failed fat tests (below) are "normal", then I guess we're > good.. I'll post a v2 shortly. Great, thanks! -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de https://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
