[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Validating ARMMP device tree blobs in LAVA



http://linux.codehelp.co.uk/?p=90

http://armv7.com/scheduler/job/3228

Current test takes a little more than 3 minutes on the imx6q-wandboard.

Issues
======

0: The current initrd needs manual updates and it should be a Debian
   rootfs. This needs scripting - the current modules need to be added
   as well. My current manual method for doing that is on the blog.
1: The initial test just does uname -a - suggestions for more relevant
   tests are welcome
2: Installer support is not ready yet. I haven't got the preseeding
   complete and most devices do not have secondary media to do an
   actual install. However, testing the kernel itself is ok.
3: Current test is tftp based, other methods can be looked at (as is
   the option of updating u-boot on relevant devices to support tftp).

Availability
============

ARMv7 devices from amongst these types:

http://armv7.com/scheduler/?device_sort=name#device_
https://staging.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/?device_sort=name#device_

(ARMv7 devices are broadly similar between
staging.validation.linaro.org and validation.linaro.org)

lava-server is in Jessie and can run these tests locally if people are
interested or if there are boards which are not yet available in LAVA
at either of the above locations.

Next steps
==========

0: A wiki page / list matching the list of dtb files here:
   https://packages.debian.org/sid/armhf/linux-image-3.14-2-armmp/filelist
   with a list of LAVA device types from those currently available.
1: A service hosted either locally by me or remotely on a debian box
   somewhere to submit jobs, one per device type, to LAVA when the
   package changes (and a new initrd built using that package becomes
   available).
2: Once more useful tests are running, we can track the performance of
   the ARMMP kernel across multiple boards over time.
3: DebConf14 is coming up and I'd like to talk about this area more at
   Portland.

There has already been discussion about a wiki page to support the
ARMMP package description - it would make sense to use the same one.
Did anyone start one?

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: