On Fri, 2015-01-16 at 10:53 -0700, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 01/09/2015 02:06 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote: > > This adds a Make include file which most selftests can then include to > > get the run_tests logic. > > > > On its own this has the advantage of some reduction in repetition, and > > also means the pass/fail message is defined in fewer places. > > > > However the key advantage is it will allow us to implement install very > > simply in a subsequent patch. > > > > The default implementation just executes each program in $(TEST_PROGS). > > > > We use a variable to hold the default implementation of $(RUN_TESTS) > > because that gives us a clean way to override it if necessary, ie. using > > override. The mount, memory-hotplug and mqueue tests use that to provide > > a different implementation. > > > > Tests are not run via /bin/bash, so if they are scripts they must be > > executable, we add u+x to several. > > > > Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > I like the shared logic approach in general provided it leaves the > flexibility to not use the shared logic if a test have the need to > do so. Yes of course it does, it's entirely optional to include lib.mk. > This series requires some patch planning. shared logic patch > followed by individual test patches as opposed a single patch. It could be a single patch too, but there's no reason to do it that way. The series works fine as I sent it. > I would like to see the shared logic work done on top of my patch v4 > series. That's a waste of time. This series replaces your v4. Doing this "on top" of your v4 would just mean reverting your v4 series and then applying this. cheers -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
