Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: split -extras target to -static and -gen

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

 



On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 10:02 AM Yauheni Kaliuta
<yauheni.kaliuta@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi, Alexei!
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 27 May 2020 09:48:04 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov  wrote:
>
>  > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 12:19 AM Yauheni Kaliuta
>  > <yauheni.kaliuta@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  >>
>  >> Hi, Alexei!
>  >>
>  >> >>>>> On Tue, 26 May 2020 22:37:39 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov  wrote:
>  >>
>  >> > On Tue, May 26, 2020 at 10:31 PM Yauheni Kaliuta
>  >> > <yauheni.kaliuta@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  >> >>
>  >> >> Hi, Andrii!
>  >> >>
>  >> >> >>>>> On Tue, 26 May 2020 17:19:18 -0700, Andrii Nakryiko  wrote:
>  >> >>
>  >> >> > On Fri, May 22, 2020 at 1:19 AM Yauheni Kaliuta
>  >> >> > <yauheni.kaliuta@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  >> >> >>
>  >> >> >> There is difference in depoying static and generated extra resource
>  >> >> >> files between in/out of tree build and flavors:
>  >> >> >>
>  >> >> >> - in case of unflavored out-of-tree build static files are not
>  >> >> >> available and must be copied as well as both static and generated
>  >> >> >> files for flavored build.
>  >> >> >>
>  >> >> >> So split the rules and variables. The name TRUNNER_EXTRA_GEN_FILES
>  >> >> >> is chosen in analogy to TEST_GEN_* variants.
>  >> >> >>
>  >> >>
>  >> >> > Can we keep them together but be smarter about what needs to
>  >> >> > be copied based on source/target directories? I would really
>  >> >> > like to not blow up all these rules.
>  >> >>
>  >> >> I can try, ok, I just find it a bit more clear. But it's good to
>  >> >> get some input from kselftest about OOT build in general.
>  >>
>  >> > I see no value in 'make install' of selftests/bpf
>  >> > and since it's broken just remove that makefile target.
>  >>
>  >> Some CI systems perform testing next stage after building were
>  >> build tree is not available anymore. So it's in use at the
>  >> moment.
>
>  > such CI systems can do 'cp -r' then
>
> It's a discussion for linux-kselftest@ (added).
>
> At the moment `make install` is generic kselftest functionality
> and since bpf is part of that infra it looks a bit strange to
> break it intentionally.

selftests/bpf is only historically part of selftests.
It probably should stop using kselftest build infra all together.
We had breakages in selftests/bpf in the past only because
of changes in kselftests bits.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux