Hi Quentin, On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 at 09:33, Quentin Schulz <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Simon, > > On 2/25/26 11:50 PM, Simon Glass wrote: > > From: Simon Glass <[email protected]> > > > > The non-dts files should not be numbered. Remove the 340_ prefix from > > Why not? Now it's more difficult for me to know which files are supposed > to be used with which dts/test.
Becuase the numbering is sequential and if two files have the number it is confusing. > > What do we do once we have a name collision? Start another numbering scheme? There are very few non-dts files, so just renaming it should be good enough. > > Honestly, I'm wondering if we shouldn't improve ftest to better split > tests. Or maybe split ftest.py into multiple files. Yes it is quite long. We could create a shared class for the common functionality and then put groups of tests in separate files. > I very much dislike > how we handle input files also. They are set at the class level and any > test can modify them. I *guess* it could be fine to have a shared input > directory among all tests, but it must be read-only so we don't have > side effects (we can then have a per-test rw input directory if necessary). Having the input dir be read-only seems good to me. Yes we have a per-test rw (output) directory (from memory, have not checked). > > I guess we could have a subdir per new ftest split which contains all > files that pertain to this test. We can group them by theme for example > to not have to have a subdir per test and overwhelm the user (though > that makes it very explicit what's to be used with what). Yes > > The change seems fine so I won't fight against merging it but I don't > see a clear benefit for it so I'll refrain from giving this a reviewer tag. OK Regards, Simon
