On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 02:15:40PM +0200, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Mon, 21 Oct 2024 at 20:07, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Oct 21, 2024 at 01:12:49PM +0200, Simon Glass wrote: > > > Hi Tom, > > > > > > On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 at 03:51, Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > Labgrid provides access to a hardware lab in an automated way. It is > > > > possible to boot U-Boot on boards in the lab without physically touching > > > > them. It relies on relays, USB UARTs and SD muxes, among other things. > > > > > > > > By way of background, about 4 years ago I wrong a thing called Labman[1] > > > > which allowed my lab of about 30 devices to be operated remotely, using > > > > tbot for the console and build integration. While it worked OK and I > > > > used it for many bisects, I didn't take it any further. > > > > > > > > It turns out that there was already an existing program, called Labgrid, > > > > which I did not know about at time (thank you Tom for telling me). It is > > > > more rounded than Labman and has a number of advantages: > > > > > > > > - does not need udev rules, mostly > > > > - has several existing users who rely on it > > > > - supports multiple machines exporting their devices > > > > > > > > It lacks a 'lab check' feature and a few other things, but these can be > > > > remedied. > > > > > > > > On and off over the past several weeks I have been experimenting with > > > > Labgrid. I have managed to create an initial U-Boot integration (this > > > > series) by adding various features to Labgrid[2] and the U-Boot test > > > > hooks. > > > > > > > > I hope that this might inspire others to set up boards and run tests > > > > automatically, rather than relying on infrequent, manual test. Perhaps > > > > it may even be possible to have a number of labs available. > > > > > > > > Included in the integration are a number of simple scripts which make it > > > > easy to connect to boards and run tests: > > > > > > > > ub-int <target> > > > > Build and boot on a target, starting an interactive session > > > > > > > > ub-cli <target> > > > > Build and boot on a target, ensure U-Boot starts and provide an > > > > interactive > > > > session from there > > > > > > > > ub-smoke <target> > > > > Smoke test U-Boot to check that it boots to a prompt on a target > > > > > > > > ub-bisect <target> > > > > Bisect a git tree to locate a failure on a particular target > > > > > > > > ub-pyt <target> <testspec> > > > > Run U-Boot pytests on a target > > > > > > > > Some of these help to provide the same tbot[4] workflow which I have > > > > relied on for several years, albeit much simpler versions. > > > > > > > > The goal here is to create some sort of script which can collect > > > > patches from the mailing list, apply them and test them on a selection > > > > of boards. I suspect that script already exists, so please let me know > > > > what you suggest. > > > > > > > > I hope you find this interesting and take a look! > > > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/sjg20/u-boot/tree/lab6a > > > > [2] https://github.com/labgrid-project/labgrid/pull/1411 > > > > [3] https://github.com/sjg20/uboot-test-hooks/tree/labgrid > > > > [4] https://tbot.tools/index.html > > > > > > > > Changes in v7: > > > > - Rebase on testb series > > > > - Expand commit message > > > > - Rename option to --use-running-system > > > > - Rebase on broken-out testb series > > > > > > > > Changes in v6: > > > > - Rebase without an earlier patch > > > > - Avoid doing the special shutdown unless USE_LABGRID is enabled > > > > - Drop patch 'test: Pass stderr to stdout' > > > > > > > > Changes in v5: > > > > - Add a few more comments > > > > - Comment out the debugging, which might be useful later > > > > - Add a patch to support testing with two board-builds > > > > > > > > Changes in v3: > > > > - Split out most patches into two new series and update cover letter > > > > > > > > Changes in v2: > > > > - Only disable echo if a terminal is detected > > > > - Avoid running a docker image for skipped lab tests > > > > > > > > Simon Glass (11): > > > > test: Allow signaling that U-Boot is ready > > > > test: Release board after tests complete > > > > test: Allow connecting to a running board > > > > test: Introduce the concept of a role > > > > test: Introduce lab mode > > > > test: Improve handling of sending commands > > > > test: Avoid double echo when starting up > > > > test: Try to shut down the lab console gracefully > > > > test: Add a section for closing the connection > > > > test: Support testing with two board-builds > > > > CI: Allow running tests on sjg lab > > > > > > > > .gitlab-ci.yml | 153 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > > test/py/conftest.py | 73 ++++++++++-- > > > > test/py/u_boot_console_base.py | 123 +++++++++++++++------ > > > > test/py/u_boot_console_exec_attach.py | 31 ++++-- > > > > test/py/u_boot_spawn.py | 36 +++++- > > > > 5 files changed, 363 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-) > > > > > > > > -- > > > > 2.34.1 > > > > > > > > > > Is there any news on these patches? I would dearly love to enable my > > > lab and this is what is needed... > > > > As our approaches are radically different I continue to be looking for > > feedback from a third person to set things up and say what does / > > doesn't work for them and their lab. I assume you're just pulling this > > in locally for use at least. > > No, I cannot pull this in locally. I would like to set up gitlab so I > (and others) can push things to it for running on the lab. Without my > patches the lab only works on a few boards. > > Could you perhaps try them out on your lab, to check they don't break > anything?
Your setup requires changes to labgrid itself, yes? -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
