On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 10:01 PM, Lucas De Marchi
<lucas.demarchi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> On Sat, Feb 4, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Dan McGee <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Ensure this dependency is explicit in the Makefile so rebuilding just
>> one test works correctly. Also reduce some repetition in the test LDADD
>
> What exactly are you fixing here?
Just because running `make check` works doesn't mean the build has
correct dependencies stated:
$ make testsuite/test-init
(CDPATH="${ZSH_VERSION+.}:" && cd . && /bin/sh
/home/dmcgee/projects/kmod/build-aux/missing --run autoheader)
rm -f stamp-h1
touch config.h.in
cd . && /bin/sh ./config.status config.h
config.status: creating config.h
config.status: config.h is unchanged
CC testsuite/testsuite_test_init-test-init.o
CC testsuite/testsuite_libtestsuite_la-testsuite.lo
GEN testsuite/rootfs
CCLD testsuite/libtestsuite.la
CC libkmod/libkmod.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-list.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-config.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-index.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-module.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-file.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-elf.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-hash.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-array.lo
CC libkmod/libkmod-util.lo
CCLD libkmod/libkmod-util.la
CCLD libkmod/libkmod-private.la
CCLD testsuite/test-init
$ ./testsuite/test-init
TESTSUITE: running test_initlib, in forked context
TESTSUITE: 'test_initlib' [13561] exited with return code 0
TESTSUITE: PASSED: test_initlib
TESTSUITE: running test_insert, in forked context
ERROR: ld.so: object
'/home/dmcgee/projects/kmod/testsuite/.libs/path.so' from LD_PRELOAD
cannot be preloaded: ignored.
ERROR: ld.so: object
'/home/dmcgee/projects/kmod/testsuite/.libs/init_module.so' from
LD_PRELOAD cannot be preloaded: ignored.
TESTSUITE: ERR: could not create module from path: No such file or directory
TESTSUITE: ERR: 'test_insert' [13562] exited with return code 1
TESTSUITE: ERR: FAILED: test_insert
>> bits by adding a new TESTSUITE_LDADD variable.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Dan McGee <dan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Makefile.am | 16 +++++++++-------
>> 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/Makefile.am b/Makefile.am
>> index 69ab986..4c03dbb 100644
>> --- a/Makefile.am
>> +++ b/Makefile.am
>> @@ -163,11 +163,13 @@ EXTRA_DIST += testsuite/rootfs.tar.xz
>> TESTSUITE_CPPFLAGS = $(AM_CPPFLAGS) \
>> -DTESTSUITE_ROOTFS=\"$(abs_top_builddir)/testsuite/rootfs/\" \
>> -DABS_TOP_BUILDDIR=\"$(abs_top_builddir)\"
>> +TESTSUITE_LDADD = testsuite/libtestsuite.la libkmod/libkmod-private.la
>
> not every test depends on these 2 convenience library. Since they are
> only tests and we are garbage collecting unused symbols, maybe to ease
> the inclusion of more tests we can indeed do what you did.
For consistency and sanity, I would think it is wise to use the same
convenience helper libraries in all cases, unless there is a real good
reason not to. I'm not too concerned about adding a few KB or 0.001
seconds to the test binary builds; I'm more concerned about making
this much more approachable for an outsider to follow the standard
pattern to add new tests.
>
>>
>> check_LTLIBRARIES += testsuite/libtestsuite.la
>> testsuite_libtestsuite_la_SOURCES = testsuite/testsuite.c \
>> testsuite/testsuite.h
>> -testsuite_libtestsuite_la_DEPENDENCIES = testsuite/rootfs
>> +testsuite_libtestsuite_la_DEPENDENCIES = testsuite/rootfs \
>> + $(TESTSUITE_OVERRIDE_LIBS)
>
> humn.... /me thinking. You are only serializing the build and telling
> autofoo to rebuild libtestsuite.la if, for example, testsuite/path.c
> changes. However testsuite/path.c will be a separate dynamic lib.
> There's no need to rebuild libtestsuite if we change it.
But does it really hurt to? See above commands that I set out to fix
here- if you can make that work with some other addition of
dependencies, let me know, but I was trying to do minimally invasive
surgery on the Makefile. I'm open to any replacement for this patch
you have that makes that case work.
> The same
> apply for the other libs (the ones in TESTSUITE_OVERRIDE_LIBS).
-Dan
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-modules" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
