test: gpio: include in build, and fixup bitrot

Commit ebaa3d053e5 ("test: fix CONFIG_ACPIGEN dependencies"), which
got into v2022.10-rc1, accidentally left out a $
before (CONFIG_DM_GPIO), with the effect that test/dm/gpio.c has not
been built for three years.

Unsurprisingly, the code in there has bit-rotted.

- There's a missing ; causing plain build fail.

  That code was added in 9bf87e256c2 ("test: dm: update test for
  open-drain/open-source emulation in gpio-uclass"), which was part of
  v2020.07-rc3, i.e. long before the commit causing gpio.c to not be
  built at all. It did build at that time, but also, the missing
  semicolon wasn't found when fa847bb409d ("test: Wrap assert macros
  in ({ ... }) and fix missing semicolons") happened in 2023.

- Commit 592b6f394ae ("led: add function naming option from linux")
  bumped sandbox,gpio-count for bank gpio_a in test.dts to 25, but
  didn't update the expected global gpio numbers accordingly.

- The "lookup by label" test likely worked when it was added, but then I
  inadvertently broke it when I noticed that dm_gpio_lookup_label()
  seemed to be broken in commit 10e66449d7e ("gpio-uclass: fix gpio
  lookup by label") - which landed in v2023.01-rc1, so after gpio.c
  was no longer being built.

  The "label" (which is a u-boot concept) that a "hogged gpio" gets is
  <gpio hog node name>.gpio-hog, which is why it used to work with the
  strncmp() but doesn't with strcmp().

  We can either revert 10e66449d7e or append the ".gpio-hog" suffix as
  done below. I don't really have a dog in that race; when I did
  10e66449d7e, it was because I thought the "lookup by label" was
  actually about the standardized gpio-line-names property, but then I
  learnt it was not, so is not at all useful to me.

- The leak check now fails.

  Test: gpio_leak: gpio.c
  test/dm/core.c:112, dm_leak_check_end(): uts->start.uordblks == end.uordblks: Expected 0x2a95b0 (2790832), got 0x2a9650 (2790992)
  test/dm/gpio.c:328, dm_test_gpio_leak(): 0 == dm_leak_check_end(uts): Expected 0x0 (0), got 0x1 (1)
  Test: gpio_leak: gpio.c (flat tree)
  test/dm/core.c:112, dm_leak_check_end(): uts->start.uordblks == end.uordblks: Expected 0x2a9650 (2790992), got 0x2a9700 (2791168)
  test/dm/gpio.c:328, dm_test_gpio_leak(): 0 == dm_leak_check_end(uts): Expected 0x0 (0), got 0x1 (1)

  And it fails with the same differences (160/176) even if I
  remove the three lines that actually exercise any of the gpio code,
  i.e. make the whole function amount to

    ut_assertok(dm_leak_check_end(uts));

  Test: gpio_leak: gpio.c
  test/dm/core.c:112, dm_leak_check_end(): uts->start.uordblks == end.uordblks: Expected 0x2a95b0 (2790832), got 0x2a9650 (2790992)
  test/dm/gpio.c:325, dm_test_gpio_leak(): 0 == dm_leak_check_end(uts): Expected 0x0 (0), got 0x1 (1)
  Test: gpio_leak: gpio.c (flat tree)
  test/dm/core.c:112, dm_leak_check_end(): uts->start.uordblks == end.uordblks: Expected 0x2a9650 (2790992), got 0x2a9700 (2791168)
  test/dm/gpio.c:325, dm_test_gpio_leak(): 0 == dm_leak_check_end(uts): Expected 0x0 (0), got 0x1 (1)

  So I suspect that the leak is somewhere in the test framework
  setup/teardown code - dm_leack_check_end() isn't really used
  anywhere else except in a dm/core test. Bisecting to figure out
  where that was introduced is somewhat of a hassle because of the
  other bitrot, and because of the SWIG failure that makes it very
  hard to build older U-Boots.

  So since it's better to have most of the gpio tests actually
  working instead of leaving all of gpio.c as dead code, #if 0 that
  part out and leave it as an archeological exercise.

Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Heiko Schocher <[email protected]>

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions