[Fuego] LTP unneeded build (was RE: Functional.LTP failed with "./ltp_target_run.sh not found")

[Fuego] LTP unneeded build (was RE: Functional.LTP failed with "./ltp_target_run.sh not found")

[Bird, Timothy]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liu, Wenlong [mailto:liuwl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com]
> A small problem:
> It seems that LTP will always be built at the first time(if LTP has never been
> built for the target ARCH before), although I have specified the "homedir" in
> spec file.
> 
> I know the default "phases" is "build deploy run", but what I want is just run
> LTP in the folder I specified and skip "build deploy".
> (I don't want to add "phases" to spec file at the same time when I specified
> the "homedir".)
> 
> I don't know if it was what you want.
> But for me, LTP "build" should be skipped when I specified "homedir" in spec
> file.
> If you think same with me, I'll fix it.
> If not, I'll specify "phases" to the spec file for my own jobs.

You're right.  The logic in test_pre_check was not correct.  The build phase
should be skipped when LTP is detected on the target board.  However,
we do need to do a deploy phase, as there are a few Fuego-specific
files that need to be copied over.  We could try to detect if these are
already there, but they are small enough that the copy operation is
fast, and it's not a pain to copy them every time we run the test.

In any event, I made a fix for this, and checked it into my master
branch (commit aba936a).
Please test it out.

Thanks for the bug report.

There is one issue outstanding, that I'm still working on, and that is
an additional LTP patch that consolidates posix results into a single
file.  Since our posix test parsing is currently non-functional, this
patch has no effect at the moment.  I'm hoping to change the
parsing code for LTP posix tests so that the patch is not needed.
 -- Tim

Re: [Fuego] LTP unneeded build (was RE: Functional.LTP failed with "./ltp_target_run.sh not found")

[Liu, Wenlong]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bird, Timothy [mailto:Tim.Bird@sony.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 10:43 AM
> To: Liu, Wenlong/刘 文龙 <liuwl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com>;
> fuego@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: LTP unneeded build (was RE: Functional.LTP failed with
> "./ltp_target_run.sh not found")
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Liu, Wenlong [mailto:liuwl.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com]
> > A small problem:
> > It seems that LTP will always be built at the first time(if LTP has
> > never been built for the target ARCH before), although I have
> > specified the "homedir" in spec file.
> >
> > I know the default "phases" is "build deploy run", but what I want is
> > just run LTP in the folder I specified and skip "build deploy".
> > (I don't want to add "phases" to spec file at the same time when I
> > specified the "homedir".)
> >
> > I don't know if it was what you want.
> > But for me, LTP "build" should be skipped when I specified "homedir"
> > in spec file.
> > If you think same with me, I'll fix it.
> > If not, I'll specify "phases" to the spec file for my own jobs.
> 
> You're right.  The logic in test_pre_check was not correct.  The build
> phase should be skipped when LTP is detected on the target board.  However,
> we do need to do a deploy phase, as there are a few Fuego-specific files
> that need to be copied over.  We could try to detect if these are already
> there, but they are small enough that the copy operation is fast, and it's
> not a pain to copy them every time we run the test.
> 
> In any event, I made a fix for this, and checked it into my master branch
> (commit aba936a).
> Please test it out.

Oh, yes, the deploy phase should not be skipped.
Thanks for your fix.
I'll test it out and let you know if I have any other questions.

> Thanks for the bug report.
> 
> There is one issue outstanding, that I'm still working on, and that is an
> additional LTP patch that consolidates posix results into a single file.
> Since our posix test parsing is currently non-functional, this patch has
> no effect at the moment.  I'm hoping to change the parsing code for LTP
> posix tests so that the patch is not needed.

Thanks.

>  -- Tim
> 
> 
>