Hi Tom,
On Mon, 23 Sept 2024 at 22:35, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 20, 2024 at 08:01:39AM +0200, Simon Glass wrote:
>
> > Sometimes we know that the board is already running the right software,
> > so provide an option to allow running of tests directly, without first
> > resetting the board.
> >
> > This saves time when re-running a test where only the Python code is
> > changing.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org>
> > ---
> >
> > (no changes since v1)
> >
> > test/py/conftest.py | 3 +++
> > test/py/u_boot_console_base.py | 14 ++++++++++----
> > test/py/u_boot_console_exec_attach.py | 21 ++++++++++++---------
> > 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/test/py/conftest.py b/test/py/conftest.py
> > index fc9dd3a83f8..ca66b9d9e61 100644
> > --- a/test/py/conftest.py
> > +++ b/test/py/conftest.py
> > @@ -79,6 +79,8 @@ def pytest_addoption(parser):
> > parser.addoption('--gdbserver', default=None,
> > help='Run sandbox under gdbserver. The argument is the channel '+
> > 'over which gdbserver should communicate, e.g. localhost:1234')
> > + parser.addoption('--no-prompt-wait', default=False,
> > action='store_true',
> > + help="Assume that U-Boot is ready and don't wait for a prompt")
>
> I don't think this is the right name for what the commit message says we
> have? Maybe something like --use-running-system or otherwise make it
> clear we're using the board as it's already up and ready to go?
OK, I can change it. The name I have chosen refers to the behaviour
rather than the effect, but switching to a flag which describes the
effect is fine with me.
Regards,
Simon
