On Fri, May 02, 2025 at 08:49:12AM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > Hi Tom, > > On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 08:34, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 08:50:16PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > During a recent discussion with Heinrich we discussed why the hooks are > > > kept in a separate repo. > > > > > > The amount of code is small, a tenth of the size of the recently added > > > lwip, just by way of example. Testing is a critical part of U-Boot and > > > one of the things that distinguishes it from firmware projects that have > > > not kept up in this area. By having the tests somewhere else, we are > > > signalling that it is unusual, or difficult, or optional. > > > > > > The hooks mechanism also needs something of an update to take account of > > > real boards in 2025. That will be much easier to undertake if the code > > > that test/py talks to is in the same repo. > > > > > > This series brings the hook files in as first-class citizens of U-Boot. > > > > > > If we do go ahead with this, I will send a different series which has > > > separate commits (with correct author) in the u-boot-test-hooks repo. > > > > I think bringing more projects directly in to the repository is a bad > > idea. Your example of lwip isn't applicable because it's a read-only > > subtree that's maintained outside of the project (same as the dts > > subtree). But sure, lets "Say Yes". That said, we still need to: > > - Remove needless examples from the tree. > > - Not include personal labs directly in the tree. > > > > That last one is why I really think this is a bad idea. The point of > > having the hooks standalone is so that any given lab can easily add > > support for their lab and manage it, without worrying about disclosing > > internal layout. There's going to be hard coded default passwords there. > > There's going to be repository secrets there. That kind of information > > really should not be in a public repository. Integrating the hooks with > > mainline will make lab management harder, not easier. The point of the > > existing labs in u-boot-test-hooks is to provide samples. > > > > I think this is all why no, we should not go down this path. > > Is it worth discussing this, or is your mind made up? I have some > thoughts on the last one.
I think it's a terrible idea that I already said: > But sure, lets "Say Yes". But please do spend time explaining your thoughts and perhaps others will also agree with you and I'll feel less bad taking this in? -- Tom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
