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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.