Hi Tom, On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 at 15:58, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 03:41:43PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > Hi Tom, > > > > On Sat, 25 Jan 2025 at 14:46, Tom Rini <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 02:31:37PM -0700, Simon Glass wrote: > > > > > > > We know this is U-Boot so the prefix serves no purpose other than to > > > > make things longer and harder to read. Drop it and rename the files. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > > > > > This is a massive bit of churn and violating namespace best practices > > > when it seems like we really need: > > > [snip] > > > > diff --git a/test/py/tests/fit_util.py b/test/py/tests/fit_util.py > > > > index 16ff8c96c63..7aad4030be3 100644 > > > > --- a/test/py/tests/fit_util.py > > > > +++ b/test/py/tests/fit_util.py > > > > @@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ > > > > > > > > import os > > > > > > > > -import u_boot_utils as util > > > > +import utils as util > > > > The real namespace is the one in site-packages, where you are supposed > > to put things in their own modules. The Python tools operate in a > > proper namespace, but so far the tests don't. They just use whatever > > directory the file is in. So, for example, we have: > > > > from tests import fs_helper > > > > where 'tests' is the subdir in test/py > > > > One option would be to move the pytests up a directory, with test.py > > in test/ and the other python files in test/u-boot and the tests in > > test/pytests or something like that. > > > > Then we would have: > > > > from tests import some_file (*) > > > > like we do in tools > > > > Also, I wouldn't call this 'massive' churn. Most files just have a > > line or two changed, with test.py and test_ut.py getting more. > > > > > > > > A lot more of this type of namespace shortening which I believe is the > > > normal Python-way of solving this issue. > > > > It doesn't really, since 'util' might conflict with something. When > > you have a set of related Python files, as with do in test/py it is > > better to use a namespace. But even then, I think we would want a > > shorter name. > > Yes, I suppose I'd rather see (and without the ubpy rename, one thing at > a time please!) moving files around such that we can then do more normal > "from foo import bar", and also avoid the silly thing of "import utils > at util" ;)
Yes, OK. Regards, Simon
