Hi, Andrii! >>>>> On Tue, 26 May 2020 15:26:43 -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 9:14 PM Yauheni Kaliuta > <yauheni.kaliuta@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Flavors of test.h are generated in tree even for out of tree >> build. Use OUTPUT directory for that. >> >> It requires rules to make sure the directories exist. >> >> Split EXTRA_CLEAN generation since existance of test.h files depends >> of dynamic makefile generation. >> >> Signed-off-by: Yauheni Kaliuta <yauheni.kaliuta@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile >> index 31598ca2d396..bade24e29a1a 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile >> @@ -83,6 +83,7 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED = test_sock_addr test_skb_cgroup_id_user \ >> test_lirc_mode2_user xdping test_cpp runqslower bench >> >> TEST_CUSTOM_PROGS = $(OUTPUT)/urandom_read >> +EXTRA_CLEAN += $(TEST_CUSTOM_PROGS) > why += instead of := here? Well, in this particular case there is no difference, but in general it looks better for me 1) unified +=, no need to track which is first; 2) for first time it makes the variable deffered evaluated which sound more appropriate (if TEST_CUSTOM_PROGS was constructed); But if you insist, I'll change it. >> >> # Emit succinct information message describing current building step >> # $1 - generic step name (e.g., CC, LINK, etc); >> @@ -267,7 +268,7 @@ TRUNNER_TEST_OBJS := $$(patsubst %.c,$$(TRUNNER_OUTPUT)/%.test.o, \ >> TRUNNER_EXTRA_OBJS := $$(patsubst %.c,$$(TRUNNER_OUTPUT)/%.o, \ >> $$(filter %.c,$(TRUNNER_EXTRA_SOURCES))) >> TRUNNER_EXTRA_HDRS := $$(filter %.h,$(TRUNNER_EXTRA_SOURCES)) >> -TRUNNER_TESTS_HDR := $(TRUNNER_TESTS_DIR)/tests.h >> +TRUNNER_TESTS_HDR := $(OUTPUT)/$(TRUNNER_TESTS_DIR)/tests.h >> TRUNNER_BPF_SRCS := $$(notdir $$(wildcard $(TRUNNER_BPF_PROGS_DIR)/*.c)) >> TRUNNER_BPF_OBJS := $$(patsubst %.c,$$(TRUNNER_OUTPUT)/%.o, $$(TRUNNER_BPF_SRCS)) >> TRUNNER_BPF_SKELS := $$(patsubst %.c,$$(TRUNNER_OUTPUT)/%.skel.h, \ >> @@ -295,6 +296,11 @@ $(TRUNNER_OUTPUT)-dir := y >> $(TRUNNER_OUTPUT): >> $$(call msg,MKDIR,,$$@) >> mkdir -p $$@ >> + >> +ifneq ($2,) >> +EXTRA_CLEAN +=$(TRUNNER_OUTPUT) >> +endif >> + >> endif >> >> # ensure we set up BPF objects generation rule just once for a given >> @@ -320,13 +326,19 @@ endif >> # ensure we set up tests.h header generation rule just once >> ifeq ($($(TRUNNER_TESTS_DIR)-tests-hdr),) >> $(TRUNNER_TESTS_DIR)-tests-hdr := y >> -$(TRUNNER_TESTS_HDR): $(TRUNNER_TESTS_DIR)/*.c >> +$(TRUNNER_TESTS_HDR): $(TRUNNER_TESTS_DIR)/*.c | $(dir $(TRUNNER_TESTS_HDR)) >> $$(call msg,TEST-HDR,$(TRUNNER_BINARY),$$@) >> $$(shell ( cd $(TRUNNER_TESTS_DIR); \ >> echo '/* Generated header, do not edit */'; \ >> ls *.c 2> /dev/null | \ >> sed -e 's@\([^\.]*\)\.c@DEFINE_TEST(\1)@'; \ >> ) > $$@) >> + >> +EXTRA_CLEAN += $(TRUNNER_TESTS_HDR) >> + >> +$(dir $(TRUNNER_TESTS_HDR)): >> + $$(call msg,MKDIR,,$$@) >> + mkdir -p $$@ >> endif >> >> # compile individual test files >> @@ -402,14 +414,23 @@ $(eval $(call DEFINE_TEST_RUNNER,test_maps)) >> # It is much simpler than test_maps/test_progs and sufficiently different from >> # them (e.g., test.h is using completely pattern), that it's worth just >> # explicitly defining all the rules explicitly. >> -verifier/tests.h: verifier/*.c >> +$(OUTPUT)/verifier/tests.h: verifier/*.c | $(OUTPUT)/verifier >> $(shell ( cd verifier/; \ >> echo '/* Generated header, do not edit */'; \ >> echo '#ifdef FILL_ARRAY'; \ >> ls *.c 2> /dev/null | sed -e 's@\(.*\)@#include \"\1\"@'; \ >> echo '#endif' \ >> - ) > verifier/tests.h) >> -$(OUTPUT)/test_verifier: test_verifier.c verifier/tests.h $(BPFOBJ) | $(OUTPUT) >> + ) > $@) >> + >> +EXTRA_CLEAN += $(OUTPUT)/verifier/tests.h >> + >> +$(OUTPUT)/verifier: >> + $(call msg,MKDIR,,$@) >> + mkdir -p $@ > See below, given this directory is well-known and sort of > static, can you just add them to the list of pre-created > directories at line 176? Agree. >> + >> +$(OUTPUT)/test_verifier: CFLAGS += -I$(abspath verifier) >> +$(OUTPUT)/test_verifier: test_verifier.c $(OUTPUT)/verifier/tests.h $(BPFOBJ) \ >> + | $(OUTPUT) >> $(call msg,BINARY,,$@) >> $(CC) $(CFLAGS) $(filter %.a %.o %.c,$^) $(LDLIBS) -o $@ >> >> @@ -433,7 +454,6 @@ $(OUTPUT)/bench: $(OUTPUT)/bench.o >> $(OUTPUT)/testing_helpers.o \ >> $(call msg,BINARY,,$@) >> $(CC) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@ $(filter %.a %.o,$^) $(LDLIBS) >> >> -EXTRA_CLEAN := $(TEST_CUSTOM_PROGS) $(SCRATCH_DIR) \ >> - prog_tests/tests.h map_tests/tests.h verifier/tests.h \ > Why not just append $(OUTPUT) to these three and keep TRUNNER > rules just a bit simpler, they don't need any extra > complexity. >> - feature \ >> - $(addprefix $(OUTPUT)/,*.o *.skel.h no_alu32 bpf_gcc) > same for no_alu32 and bpf_gcc, just append $(OUTPUT)/ to them? Well, it's possible, but for me it looks a bit wrong. It sort of creates 2 points of sync -- the calls to dynamic rule creation and here (skip/add dynamic call -- change clean rule), and having it in the place were all the code handling flavors located sounds a bit more correct for me. But since there are not a lot of them if you find it nicer, I'll do that. >> +EXTRA_CLEAN += $(SCRATCH_DIR) \ >> + feature \ >> + $(addprefix $(OUTPUT)/,*.o *.skel.h) >> -- >> 2.26.2 >> -- WBR, Yauheni Kaliuta
