[PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Mark Brown]

Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
Makefiles want to work.

v2:
 - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.

Mark Brown (4):
  selftests/arm64: Use TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED in the FP Makefile
  selftests/arm64: Define top_srcdir for the fp tests
  selftests/arm64: Clean the fp helper libraries
  selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the floating point tests

 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 29 +++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)


base-commit: b2d229d4ddb17db541098b83524d901257e93845
-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Mark Brown]

Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
Makefiles want to work.

v2:
 - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.

Mark Brown (4):
  selftests/arm64: Use TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED in the FP Makefile
  selftests/arm64: Define top_srcdir for the fp tests
  selftests/arm64: Clean the fp helper libraries
  selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the floating point tests

 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 29 +++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)


base-commit: b2d229d4ddb17db541098b83524d901257e93845
-- 
2.30.2


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v2 1/4] selftests/arm64: Use TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED in the FP Makefile

[Mark Brown]

The kselftest lib.mk provides a default all target which builds additional
programs from TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED, use that rather than using
TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED which is for programs that don't need to be built like
shell scripts. Leave fpsimd-stress and sve-stress there since they are
scripts.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
index 95f0b877a060..774c38cee317 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
@@ -2,12 +2,11 @@
 
 CFLAGS += -I../../../../../usr/include/
 TEST_GEN_PROGS := sve-ptrace sve-probe-vls vec-syscfg
-TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test fpsimd-stress \
+TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
 	rdvl-sve \
-	sve-test sve-stress \
+	sve-test \
 	vlset
-
-all: $(TEST_GEN_PROGS) $(TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED)
+TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fpsimd-stress sve-stress
 
 fp-pidbench: fp-pidbench.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH v2 1/4] selftests/arm64: Use TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED in the FP Makefile

[Mark Brown]

The kselftest lib.mk provides a default all target which builds additional
programs from TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED, use that rather than using
TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED which is for programs that don't need to be built like
shell scripts. Leave fpsimd-stress and sve-stress there since they are
scripts.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 7 +++----
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
index 95f0b877a060..774c38cee317 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
@@ -2,12 +2,11 @@
 
 CFLAGS += -I../../../../../usr/include/
 TEST_GEN_PROGS := sve-ptrace sve-probe-vls vec-syscfg
-TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test fpsimd-stress \
+TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
 	rdvl-sve \
-	sve-test sve-stress \
+	sve-test \
 	vlset
-
-all: $(TEST_GEN_PROGS) $(TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED)
+TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fpsimd-stress sve-stress
 
 fp-pidbench: fp-pidbench.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
-- 
2.30.2


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v2 2/4] selftests/arm64: Define top_srcdir for the fp tests

[Mark Brown]

Some of the rules in lib.mk use a top_srcdir variable to figure out where
the top of the kselftest tree is, provide it.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
index 774c38cee317..41b420050765 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
@@ -1,6 +1,10 @@
 # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
 
-CFLAGS += -I../../../../../usr/include/
+# A proper top_srcdir is needed by KSFT(lib.mk)
+top_srcdir = $(realpath ../../../../../)
+
+CFLAGS += -I$(top_srcdir)/usr/include/
+
 TEST_GEN_PROGS := sve-ptrace sve-probe-vls vec-syscfg
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
 	rdvl-sve \
-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH v2 2/4] selftests/arm64: Define top_srcdir for the fp tests

[Mark Brown]

Some of the rules in lib.mk use a top_srcdir variable to figure out where
the top of the kselftest tree is, provide it.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
index 774c38cee317..41b420050765 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
@@ -1,6 +1,10 @@
 # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
 
-CFLAGS += -I../../../../../usr/include/
+# A proper top_srcdir is needed by KSFT(lib.mk)
+top_srcdir = $(realpath ../../../../../)
+
+CFLAGS += -I$(top_srcdir)/usr/include/
+
 TEST_GEN_PROGS := sve-ptrace sve-probe-vls vec-syscfg
 TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
 	rdvl-sve \
-- 
2.30.2


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v2 3/4] selftests/arm64: Clean the fp helper libraries

[Mark Brown]

We provide a couple of object files with helpers linked into several of
the test programs, ensure they are cleaned.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
index 41b420050765..927b1e83f469 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
 	vlset
 TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fpsimd-stress sve-stress
 
+EXTRA_CLEAN += $(OUTPUT)/asm-utils.o $(OUTPUT)/rdvl.o
+
 fp-pidbench: fp-pidbench.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
 fpsimd-test: fpsimd-test.o asm-utils.o
-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH v2 3/4] selftests/arm64: Clean the fp helper libraries

[Mark Brown]

We provide a couple of object files with helpers linked into several of
the test programs, ensure they are cleaned.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
index 41b420050765..927b1e83f469 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
@@ -12,6 +12,8 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
 	vlset
 TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fpsimd-stress sve-stress
 
+EXTRA_CLEAN += $(OUTPUT)/asm-utils.o $(OUTPUT)/rdvl.o
+
 fp-pidbench: fp-pidbench.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
 fpsimd-test: fpsimd-test.o asm-utils.o
-- 
2.30.2


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

[PATCH v2 4/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the floating point tests

[Mark Brown]

Currently the arm64 floating point tests don't support out of tree builds
due to two quirks of the kselftest build system. One is that when building
a program from multiple files we shouldn't separately compile the main
program to an object file as that will result in the pattern rule not
matching when adjusted for the output directory. The other is that we also
need to include $(OUTPUT) in the names of the binaries when specifying the
dependencies in order to ensure that they get picked up with O=.

Rewrite the dependencies for the executables to fix these issues. The
kselftest build system will ensure OUTPUT is always defined.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 16 ++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
index 927b1e83f469..45bbbf1c5b97 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
@@ -14,16 +14,16 @@ TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fpsimd-stress sve-stress
 
 EXTRA_CLEAN += $(OUTPUT)/asm-utils.o $(OUTPUT)/rdvl.o
 
-fp-pidbench: fp-pidbench.S asm-utils.o
+$(OUTPUT)/fp-pidbench: fp-pidbench.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
-fpsimd-test: fpsimd-test.o asm-utils.o
+$(OUTPUT)/fpsimd-test: fpsimd-test.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
-rdvl-sve: rdvl-sve.o rdvl.o
-sve-ptrace: sve-ptrace.o
-sve-probe-vls: sve-probe-vls.o rdvl.o
-sve-test: sve-test.o asm-utils.o
+$(OUTPUT)/rdvl-sve: rdvl-sve.c rdvl.o
+$(OUTPUT)/sve-ptrace: sve-ptrace.c
+$(OUTPUT)/sve-probe-vls: sve-probe-vls.c rdvl.o
+$(OUTPUT)/sve-test: sve-test.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
-vec-syscfg: vec-syscfg.o rdvl.o
-vlset: vlset.o
+$(OUTPUT)/vec-syscfg: vec-syscfg.c rdvl.o
+$(OUTPUT)/vlset: vlset.c
 
 include ../../lib.mk
-- 
2.30.2

[PATCH v2 4/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the floating point tests

[Mark Brown]

Currently the arm64 floating point tests don't support out of tree builds
due to two quirks of the kselftest build system. One is that when building
a program from multiple files we shouldn't separately compile the main
program to an object file as that will result in the pattern rule not
matching when adjusted for the output directory. The other is that we also
need to include $(OUTPUT) in the names of the binaries when specifying the
dependencies in order to ensure that they get picked up with O=.

Rewrite the dependencies for the executables to fix these issues. The
kselftest build system will ensure OUTPUT is always defined.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 16 ++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
index 927b1e83f469..45bbbf1c5b97 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
@@ -14,16 +14,16 @@ TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fpsimd-stress sve-stress
 
 EXTRA_CLEAN += $(OUTPUT)/asm-utils.o $(OUTPUT)/rdvl.o
 
-fp-pidbench: fp-pidbench.S asm-utils.o
+$(OUTPUT)/fp-pidbench: fp-pidbench.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
-fpsimd-test: fpsimd-test.o asm-utils.o
+$(OUTPUT)/fpsimd-test: fpsimd-test.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
-rdvl-sve: rdvl-sve.o rdvl.o
-sve-ptrace: sve-ptrace.o
-sve-probe-vls: sve-probe-vls.o rdvl.o
-sve-test: sve-test.o asm-utils.o
+$(OUTPUT)/rdvl-sve: rdvl-sve.c rdvl.o
+$(OUTPUT)/sve-ptrace: sve-ptrace.c
+$(OUTPUT)/sve-probe-vls: sve-probe-vls.c rdvl.o
+$(OUTPUT)/sve-test: sve-test.S asm-utils.o
 	$(CC) -nostdlib $^ -o $@
-vec-syscfg: vec-syscfg.o rdvl.o
-vlset: vlset.o
+$(OUTPUT)/vec-syscfg: vec-syscfg.c rdvl.o
+$(OUTPUT)/vlset: vlset.c
 
 include ../../lib.mk
-- 
2.30.2


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Catalin Marinas]

Hi Mark,

On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 09:04:38PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
> series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
> Makefiles want to work.
> 
> v2:
>  - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.

Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Thanks.

-- 
Catalin

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Catalin Marinas]

Hi Mark,

On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 09:04:38PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
> series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
> Makefiles want to work.
> 
> v2:
>  - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.

Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Thanks.

-- 
Catalin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Catalin Marinas]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:48PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 09:04:38PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
> > series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
> > Makefiles want to work.
> > 
> > v2:
> >  - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.
> 
> Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Unless you aimed these at 5.18 but I don't think they are urgent.

-- 
Catalin

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Catalin Marinas]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:48PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 09:04:38PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
> > series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
> > Makefiles want to work.
> > 
> > v2:
> >  - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.
> 
> Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Unless you aimed these at 5.18 but I don't think they are urgent.

-- 
Catalin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 462 bytes --]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:43PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

> Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Sure.  BTW note that the kselftest branch doesn't build since it doesn't
include the SME branch so the test programs for the SME ABI haven't got
a bunch of defintions that they're relying on.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 462 bytes --]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:43PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

> Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Sure.  BTW note that the kselftest branch doesn't build since it doesn't
include the SME branch so the test programs for the SME ABI haven't got
a bunch of defintions that they're relying on.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Catalin Marinas]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:50:30PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:43PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> > branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> > I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).
> 
> Sure.  BTW note that the kselftest branch doesn't build since it doesn't
> include the SME branch so the test programs for the SME ABI haven't got
> a bunch of defintions that they're relying on.

Ah, I haven't tried it independently. I'll probably merge the sme branch
into it.

-- 
Catalin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

[Catalin Marinas]

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:50:30PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:43PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> > branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> > I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).
> 
> Sure.  BTW note that the kselftest branch doesn't build since it doesn't
> include the SME branch so the test programs for the SME ABI haven't got
> a bunch of defintions that they're relying on.

Ah, I haven't tried it independently. I'll probably merge the sme branch
into it.

-- 
Catalin