Re: [PATCH 2/4] mk: remove broken check

[Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>]

On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 01:53:46PM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> 09/10/2018 13:43, Neil Horman:
> > On Tue, Oct 09, 2018 at 04:18:56AM +0200, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > > Next patch does not pass the experimental check
> > > because it has an (unrelated) experimental function in his context.
> > > 
> > > Cc: Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
> > > ---
> > >  mk/internal/rte.compile-pre.mk | 1 -
> > >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/mk/internal/rte.compile-pre.mk b/mk/internal/rte.compile-pre.mk
> > > index a734cbbd0..acb9796fa 100644
> > > --- a/mk/internal/rte.compile-pre.mk
> > > +++ b/mk/internal/rte.compile-pre.mk
> > > @@ -75,7 +75,6 @@ C_TO_O_DO = @set -e; \
> > >  	echo $(C_TO_O_DISP); \
> > >  	$(C_TO_O) && \
> > >  	$(PMDINFO_TO_O) && \
> > > -	$(CHECK_EXPERIMENTAL) && \
> > >  	echo $(C_TO_O_CMD) > $(call obj2cmd,$(@)) && \
> > >  	sed 's,'$@':,dep_'$@' =,' $(call obj2dep,$(@)).tmp > $(call obj2dep,$(@)) && \
> > >  	rm -f $(call obj2dep,$(@)).tmp
> > 
> > NACK.
> 
> Yes, of course.
> I have added this patch in the series in order to allow building the patches.
> 
> > Its a bit vague to get the meaning of your changelog, but based on the
> > context of the actual other patch I think what you're saying is that patch 3/4 in
> > this series has the __rte_experimental token in it as part of the context of a
> > diff, rather than as a change itself, and the check-experimental-syms script is
> > matching on that when it shouldn't.  The correct fix is to teach the difference
> > between changes and context to the check-experimental-syms.sh script, not to
> > break the whole thing by just removing the call to the script.
> 
> I agree, but I don't understand how the patch context is related
> to the checks done in buildtools.
> Please could you fix it? It is blocking the integration of this series.
> 
Yeah, I'll get to it as soon as possible, but please lead with this rather than
just dismantling the feature :)

Neil

> Thanks
> 
> 
>