From: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>
To: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>
Cc: "Ian Jackson" <iwj@xenproject.org>, "Wei Liu" <wl@xen.org>,
"Roger Pau Monné" <roger.pau@citrix.com>,
"Juergen Gross" <jgross@suse.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] tools/tests: Drop run runes
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 15:59:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8fbb2de3-b2be-e767-346b-29df378eb8a3@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4a57467a-36ea-bd5b-7e6a-ed0dfaa33314@citrix.com>
On 16.06.2021 15:08, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 16/06/2021 07:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 15.06.2021 18:19, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>>> --- a/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile
>>> +++ b/tools/tests/x86_emulator/Makefile
>>> @@ -7,10 +7,6 @@ TARGET := test_x86_emulator
>>> .PHONY: all
>>> all:
>>>
>>> -.PHONY: run
>>> -run: $(TARGET)
>>> - ./$(TARGET)
>>> -
>>> # Add libx86 to the build
>>> vpath %.c $(XEN_ROOT)/xen/lib/x86
>>>
>> This is not only incomplete, but actively (specifically here for my
>> own frequent using of it, but other tests I do run occasionally as
>> well, and then also that same way) harming things as long as you
>> don't introduce an alternative way. Note the top-level Makefile
>> making use of these rules, and note also the run32 companion here.
>
> Honestly, this makefile is borderline impossible to follow. I failed to
> make the install runes work, which is part of why I deferred the
> unit-like tests for now.
Well, yes, it's not pretty, but I lack ideas for a clear improvement.
> But I'm taking this as a strong preference to keep the run target?
Yes, and not just here. Any test that can be run directly in the build
tree would imo better have such a target, so re-building and running
it can be invoked with a single make invocation. Having to re-build
the entire tools/ in order to then (re-)run one of these tests is, in
particular, way too much latency.
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-16 13:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-15 16:19 [PATCH 0/5] tools/tests: More cleanup for automation improvements Andrew Cooper
2021-06-15 16:19 ` [PATCH 1/5] tools/tests: Drop obsolete mce-test infrastructure Andrew Cooper
2021-06-16 6:46 ` Jan Beulich
2021-06-16 12:51 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-06-15 16:19 ` [PATCH 2/5] tools/tests: Drop run runes Andrew Cooper
2021-06-16 6:44 ` Jan Beulich
2021-06-16 13:08 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-06-16 13:59 ` Jan Beulich [this message]
2021-06-15 16:19 ` [PATCH 3/5] tests/resource: Rework Makefile Andrew Cooper
2021-06-15 16:49 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-06-15 16:19 ` [PATCH 4/5] tests/cpu-policy: " Andrew Cooper
2021-06-15 16:19 ` [PATCH 5/5] tests/xenstore: " Andrew Cooper
2021-06-15 17:37 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-06-16 6:38 ` [PATCH 0/5] tools/tests: More cleanup for automation improvements Jan Beulich
2021-06-16 13:22 ` Andrew Cooper
2021-06-16 14:14 ` Jan Beulich
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8fbb2de3-b2be-e767-346b-29df378eb8a3@suse.com \
--to=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=iwj@xenproject.org \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=roger.pau@citrix.com \
--cc=wl@xen.org \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).