All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/arm64: Fix mismerge of Makefile for fp tests
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2022 20:43:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YpkS5NXLCxyhN5E9@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220524151454.1487390-1-broonie@kernel.org>

On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 04:14:54PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> The FP Makefile defines two TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED instead of one of them and one
> one TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED for the programs that need compilation. Fix
> that.
> 
> Fixes: a59f7a7f76407da78 ("selftests/arm64: Use TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED in the FP Makefile")
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
> index a41fef2c9669..36db61358ed5 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS := fp-stress \
>  	sve-ptrace sve-probe-vls \
>  	vec-syscfg \
>  	za-fork za-ptrace
> -TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
>  	rdvl-sme rdvl-sve \
>  	sve-test \
>  	ssve-test \

Do we still need this? The fixed commit already uses
TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED and that's what it seems to be in current
mainline. Unless there was a mismerge in -next (I haven't checked).

-- 
Catalin

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/arm64: Fix mismerge of Makefile for fp tests
Date: Thu, 2 Jun 2022 20:43:32 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YpkS5NXLCxyhN5E9@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220524151454.1487390-1-broonie@kernel.org>

On Tue, May 24, 2022 at 04:14:54PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> The FP Makefile defines two TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED instead of one of them and one
> one TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED for the programs that need compilation. Fix
> that.
> 
> Fixes: a59f7a7f76407da78 ("selftests/arm64: Use TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED in the FP Makefile")
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
> index a41fef2c9669..36db61358ed5 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile
> @@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ TEST_GEN_PROGS := fp-stress \
>  	sve-ptrace sve-probe-vls \
>  	vec-syscfg \
>  	za-fork za-ptrace
> -TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
> +TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED := fp-pidbench fpsimd-test \
>  	rdvl-sme rdvl-sve \
>  	sve-test \
>  	ssve-test \

Do we still need this? The fixed commit already uses
TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED and that's what it seems to be in current
mainline. Unless there was a mismerge in -next (I haven't checked).

-- 
Catalin

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

  reply	other threads:[~2022-06-02 19:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-24 15:14 [PATCH] selftests/arm64: Fix mismerge of Makefile for fp tests Mark Brown
2022-05-24 15:14 ` Mark Brown
2022-06-02 19:43 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2022-06-02 19:43   ` Catalin Marinas
2022-06-03  9:21   ` Mark Brown
2022-06-03  9:21     ` Mark Brown

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=YpkS5NXLCxyhN5E9@arm.com \
    --to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=will@kernel.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.