Hello,
On 5/12/26 12:39, Alexander Hansen wrote:
Hi Cedric,
thanks for your ongoing review :)
yeah. It takes a few respins.
I sent v5, summary of changes:
I see a v3.
What's below would have been great in a cover letter ;)
- I CCd you and Titus on all the patches now.
- removed the backticks (markdown syntax) from my patches. I was used to this
workflow since some other projects use commit linters which get tripped up by
log outputs.
- restructured the series as you suggested (board, then functional test, then
sensors)
- removed some unused includes on the machine file
- removed some unnecessary variables from the machine file
- linked to your github tree for the fw image for the functional test, since
the image is now available there
- added new section for each sensor to the functional test with some command
sequences and expected outputs
- added new entries in MAINTAINERS file for Titus for the individual sensors.
Your maintenance of the fby4 seems to already be covered by existing regex.
Let me know in case there is extra tests i should write for the sensors other
than the functional test.
I saw the tests/qtest/tmp105-test.c , would that be helpful for the new sensors
as well to write a test like that?
It is always useful to have, especially for covering corner cases
in the model that are harder to exercise when running a full OS
image. Some MMIO sequences are much easier to test in qtest than
by building custom firmware for them. It really depends on the
complexity and criticality of the model.
Thanks,
C.
