On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 06:46:23PM -0600, Tom Rini wrote: > On Sun, Sep 29, 2024 at 04:49:17PM -0600, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Fabio, > > > > On Sun, 29 Sept 2024 at 14:53, Fabio Estevam <feste...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Simon, Marek, and Tom, > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 5:47???PM Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Please can you coordinate with Marek as we need to sort out the test > > > > > coverage for this etype, before adding more functionality. I did a > > > > > starting point, now in -next, which should help. > > > > > > > > Well, when someone has both time and understanding of the tools and the > > > > frameworks, we can expand the automatic tests while still having > > > > functional testing as people use the feature. > > > > > > Do you think this patch should be applied as is? Could the tests be > > > handled later? > > > > > > Please let me know. > > > > Who is going to handle the tests later and when? > > Someone, once how to write and run the tests is documented. That's a > big hurdle this private thread has shown, to me at least. > > -- > Tom
Hi, I fixed a minor issue in the patch, and sent a revised version. Seems that you don't have the testing quite defined yet, so I don't know what I can contribute there. Maybe something can be done with the CSF parser to check that the signing works correctly? However, I think this feature is quite benign, and it would be great to get some functional testing in for this feature, as Tom said. For us, this is an important feature, so we have done extensive testing internally to verify that it works. Best, Brian
