Hi Andre, On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 at 07:18, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> wrote: > > On Tue, 12 Jul 2022 04:58:35 -0600 > Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > many thanks for having a look! > > > On Tue, 5 Jul 2022 at 11:14, Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> wrote: > > > > > > Explicitly specifying the exact filenames of devicetree overlays files > > > on a U-Boot command line can be quite tedious for users, especially > > > when it should be made persistent for every boot. > > > > > > To simplify the task of applying (custom) DT overlays, introduce a > > > "fdt apply-all" subcommand, that iterates a given directory in any > > > supported filesystem, and tries to apply every .dtbo file found it > > > there. > > > > > > This allows users to simply drop a DT overlay file into a magic > > > directory, and it will be applied on the next boot automatically, > > > by the virtue of just a generic U-Boot command call. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Andre Przywara <andre.przyw...@arm.com> > > > --- > > > cmd/fdt.c | 89 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > > 1 file changed, 88 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > This looks OK, but can you please add a test (see test/dm/acpi.c for > > example) and doc/usage/cmd file? > > Is that supposed to run inside the sandbox? I briefly tested this there, > only to realise that the sandbox' hostfs does not support the directory > operations (fs_opendir_unsupported). I haven't thought about it too much, > nor do I have much experience with U-Boot's test framework, but this sounds > like a problem?
Yes that is a problem, although it would not be too hard to implement, I think. Also I sent a little series to add a test for 'fdt addr' which might make it easier for you. > > > Also, apply_all is a bit annoying as we try to allow command > > completion and abbreviations to work. Given that the args are > > different I don't think a -d (for dir) flag makes sense. > > > > Perhaps 'fdt fsapply' ? > > Yeah, I wasn't happy with that name either, but couldn't come up with a > better name. "fsapply" seems to be a nice alternative, I will go with that! OK good. Regards, Simon
