On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 11:34:05AM GMT, Peng Fan wrote:
Subject: Re: [PATCH] test/vsock: add install target
On Wed, Jul 10, 2024 at 08:11:32AM GMT, Peng Fan wrote:
>> Subject: Re: [PATCH] test/vsock: add install target
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 09, 2024 at 09:50:51PM GMT, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
>> >From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
>> >
>> >Add install target for vsock to make Yocto easy to install the
images.
>> >
>> >Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx>
>> >---
>> > tools/testing/vsock/Makefile | 12 ++++++++++++
>> > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+)
>> >
>> >diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile
>> >b/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile index a7f56a09ca9f..5c8442fa9460
>> 100644
>> >--- a/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile
>> >+++ b/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile
>> >@@ -8,8 +8,20 @@ vsock_perf: vsock_perf.o
>> msg_zerocopy_common.o
>> > vsock_uring_test: LDLIBS = -luring
>> > vsock_uring_test: control.o util.o vsock_uring_test.o timeout.o
>> >msg_zerocopy_common.o
>> >
>> >+VSOCK_INSTALL_PATH ?= $(abspath .)
>> >+# Avoid changing the rest of the logic here and lib.mk.
>> >+INSTALL_PATH := $(VSOCK_INSTALL_PATH)
>> >+
>> > CFLAGS += -g -O2 -Werror -Wall -I. -I../../include
>> > -I../../../usr/include -Wno-pointer-sign -fno-strict-overflow
>> > -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -MMD -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -
>> D_GNU_SOURCE
>> > .PHONY: all test clean
>> > clean:
>> > ${RM} *.o *.d vsock_test vsock_diag_test vsock_perf
>> vsock_uring_test
>> > -include *.d
>> >+
>> >+install: all
>> >+ @# Ask all targets to install their files
>> >+ mkdir -p $(INSTALL_PATH)/vsock
>>
>> why using the "vsock" subdir?
>>
>> IIUC you were inspired by selftests/Makefile, but it installs under
>> $(INSTALL_PATH)/kselftest/ the scripts used by the main one
>> `run_kselftest.sh`, which is installed in $(INSTALL_PATH instead.
>> So in this case I would install everything in $(INSTALL_PATH).
>>
>> WDYT?
>
>I agree.
>
>>
>> >+ install -m 744 vsock_test $(INSTALL_PATH)/vsock/
>> >+ install -m 744 vsock_perf $(INSTALL_PATH)/vsock/
>> >+ install -m 744 vsock_diag_test $(INSTALL_PATH)/vsock/
>> >+ install -m 744 vsock_uring_test $(INSTALL_PATH)/vsock/
>>
>> Also from selftests/Makefile, what about using the ifdef instead of
>> using $(abspath .) as default place?
>>
>> I mean this:
>>
>> install: all
>> ifdef INSTALL_PATH
>> ...
>> else
>> $(error Error: set INSTALL_PATH to use install) endif
>
>Is the following looks good to you?
>
># Avoid conflict with INSTALL_PATH set by the main Makefile
>VSOCK_INSTALL_PATH ?= INSTALL_PATH := $(VSOCK_INSTALL_PATH)
I'm not a super Makefile expert, but why do we need both
VSOCK_INSTALL_PATH and INSTALL_PATH?
INSTALL_PATH is exported by kernel root directory makefile.
So to user, we need to avoid export INSTALL_PATH here.
So I just follow selftests/Makefile using KSFT_INSTALL_PATH
There is a comment there:
# Avoid changing the rest of the logic here and lib.mk.
Added by commit 17eac6c2db8b2cdfe33d40229bdda2acd86b304a.
IIUC they re-used INSTALL_PATH, just to avoid too many changes in that
file and in tools/testing/selftests/lib.mk
So, IMHO we should not care about it and only use VSOCK_INSTALL_PATH if
you don't want to conflict with INSTALL_PATH.
Stefano
