On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 20:14 -0700, John Stultz wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Shuah Khan <shuahkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Change the timers Makefile to make use of shared run and install > > logic in lib.mk. Destructive tests are installed. Regular tests > > are emited to run_kselftest script to match the run_tests behavior. > > > > Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <shuahkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/timers/Makefile | 20 +++++++++++--------- > > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/timers/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/timers/Makefile > > index 9da3498..61e7284 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/timers/Makefile > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/timers/Makefile > > @@ -7,19 +7,21 @@ bins = posix_timers nanosleep inconsistency-check nsleep-lat raw_skew \ > > alarmtimer-suspend change_skew skew_consistency clocksource-switch \ > > leap-a-day leapcrash set-tai set-2038 > > > > +TEST_PROGS = posix_timers nanosleep nsleep-lat set-timer-lat mqueue-lat \ > > + inconsistency-check raw_skew > > +TEST_FILES = threadtest alarmtimer-suspend valid-adjtimex change_skew \ > > + skew_consistency clocksource-switch leap-a-day leapcrash \ > > + set-tai set-2038 > > + > > +RUN_TESTS_WITH_ARGS := ./threadtest -t 30 -n 8 || echo "selftests: threadtest [FAIL]" > > + > > +EMIT_TESTS_WITH_ARGS := echo "$(RUN_TESTS_WITH_ARGS)" > > + > > So my make-foo isn't very strong, but no objections from me. > > My only thoughts: > 1) Would it be better if threadtest can be made to have better > defaults for kselftest so you don't need that extra logic? That would help. But with the patch I just sent I think it's no bother, it's only a little extra logic and it's only in the timers Makefile. > 2) While I get that TEST_FILES is likely going to be used to copy the > destructive tests over, It feels a little like its being bundled in > with something like data files that tests might need, which seems sort > of hackish. Would TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED or something be more clear and > make more sense? That doesn't really bother me. You're right that TEST_FILES is originally intended for data files etc. but I don't think it's a big hack to use it for other tests that shouldn't be run by default. Still if it bothers you I'm happy to add a separate variable for it, they are cheap :) cheers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
