[PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[Willy Tarreau]

As suggested by Ingo, this header file might benefit other tools than
just rcutorture. For now it's quite limited, but is easy to extend, so
exposing it into tools/include/nolibc/ will make it much easier to
adopt by other tools.

The mkinitrd.sh script in rcutorture was updated to use this new location.

Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
---
 tools/{testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin => include/nolibc}/nolibc.h | 0
 tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh                  | 4 ++--
 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 rename tools/{testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin => include/nolibc}/nolibc.h (100%)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/nolibc.h b/tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h
similarity index 100%
rename from tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/nolibc.h
rename to tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh
index da29839..d93bca1 100755
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh
@@ -124,8 +124,8 @@ if echo -e "#if __x86_64__||__i386__||__i486__||__i586__||__i686__" \
    | grep -q '^yes'; then
 	# architecture supported by nolibc
         ${CROSS_COMPILE}gcc -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -fno-ident \
-		-nostdlib -include ../bin/nolibc.h -lgcc -s -static -Os \
-		-o init init.c
+		-nostdlib -include ../../../../include/nolibc/nolibc.h \
+		-lgcc -s -static -Os -o init init.c
 else
 	${CROSS_COMPILE}gcc -s -static -Os -o init init.c
 fi
-- 
2.9.0

Re: [PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 07:04:53PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> As suggested by Ingo, this header file might benefit other tools than
> just rcutorture. For now it's quite limited, but is easy to extend, so
> exposing it into tools/include/nolibc/ will make it much easier to
> adopt by other tools.
> 
> The mkinitrd.sh script in rcutorture was updated to use this new location.
> 
> Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
> Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>

Thank you, Willy!  I have queued all four of these.  Should there
be a MAINTAINERS file entry for the new include/nolibc home for this
library code?

							Thanx, Paul

> ---
>  tools/{testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin => include/nolibc}/nolibc.h | 0
>  tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh                  | 4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>  rename tools/{testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin => include/nolibc}/nolibc.h (100%)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/nolibc.h b/tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h
> similarity index 100%
> rename from tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/nolibc.h
> rename to tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh
> index da29839..d93bca1 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/rcutorture/bin/mkinitrd.sh
> @@ -124,8 +124,8 @@ if echo -e "#if __x86_64__||__i386__||__i486__||__i586__||__i686__" \
>     | grep -q '^yes'; then
>  	# architecture supported by nolibc
>          ${CROSS_COMPILE}gcc -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -fno-ident \
> -		-nostdlib -include ../bin/nolibc.h -lgcc -s -static -Os \
> -		-o init init.c
> +		-nostdlib -include ../../../../include/nolibc/nolibc.h \
> +		-lgcc -s -static -Os -o init init.c
>  else
>  	${CROSS_COMPILE}gcc -s -static -Os -o init init.c
>  fi
> -- 
> 2.9.0
> 

Re: [PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[Willy Tarreau]

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:25:08AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 07:04:53PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > As suggested by Ingo, this header file might benefit other tools than
> > just rcutorture. For now it's quite limited, but is easy to extend, so
> > exposing it into tools/include/nolibc/ will make it much easier to
> > adopt by other tools.
> > 
> > The mkinitrd.sh script in rcutorture was updated to use this new location.
> > 
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
> 
> Thank you, Willy!

You're welcome!

> I have queued all four of these.

Thanks!

> Should there
> be a MAINTAINERS file entry for the new include/nolibc home for this
> library code?

Good idea, I didn't think about it. Yes, I can add one and will
send another patch. In case that helps I've created a repo at
/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wtarreau/nolibc.git

Cheers,
Willy

Re: [PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[Paul E. McKenney]

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 07:30:47PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:25:08AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 07:04:53PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > As suggested by Ingo, this header file might benefit other tools than
> > > just rcutorture. For now it's quite limited, but is easy to extend, so
> > > exposing it into tools/include/nolibc/ will make it much easier to
> > > adopt by other tools.
> > > 
> > > The mkinitrd.sh script in rcutorture was updated to use this new location.
> > > 
> > > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
> > > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
> > 
> > Thank you, Willy!
> 
> You're welcome!
> 
> > I have queued all four of these.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> > Should there
> > be a MAINTAINERS file entry for the new include/nolibc home for this
> > library code?
> 
> Good idea, I didn't think about it. Yes, I can add one and will
> send another patch. In case that helps I've created a repo at
> /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wtarreau/nolibc.git

And I have queued that one as well, thank you!

I am happy to curate nolibc patches indefinitely, but should some other
pathway to mainline become better for you, just let me know.

							Thanx, Paul

Re: [PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[Willy Tarreau]

On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 11:55:18AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 07:30:47PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 10:25:08AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 07:04:53PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > > > As suggested by Ingo, this header file might benefit other tools than
> > > > just rcutorture. For now it's quite limited, but is easy to extend, so
> > > > exposing it into tools/include/nolibc/ will make it much easier to
> > > > adopt by other tools.
> > > > 
> > > > The mkinitrd.sh script in rcutorture was updated to use this new location.
> > > > 
> > > > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > > > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
> > > > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
> > > 
> > > Thank you, Willy!
> > 
> > You're welcome!
> > 
> > > I have queued all four of these.
> > 
> > Thanks!
> > 
> > > Should there
> > > be a MAINTAINERS file entry for the new include/nolibc home for this
> > > library code?
> > 
> > Good idea, I didn't think about it. Yes, I can add one and will
> > send another patch. In case that helps I've created a repo at
> > /pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/wtarreau/nolibc.git
> 
> And I have queued that one as well, thank you!
> 
> I am happy to curate nolibc patches indefinitely, but should some other
> pathway to mainline become better for you, just let me know.

Oh perfect, thank you. I'm always having difficulties with processes,
so having a known working path to mainline is indeed a much appreciated
help!

Thanks,
Willy

Re: [PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[Ingo Molnar]

* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.ibm.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Dec 29, 2018 at 07:04:53PM +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> > As suggested by Ingo, this header file might benefit other tools than
> > just rcutorture. For now it's quite limited, but is easy to extend, so
> > exposing it into tools/include/nolibc/ will make it much easier to
> > adopt by other tools.
> > 
> > The mkinitrd.sh script in rcutorture was updated to use this new location.
> > 
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
> > Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
> 
> Thank you, Willy!  I have queued all four of these.  Should there
> be a MAINTAINERS file entry for the new include/nolibc home for this
> library code?

Very good idea - ack. Could we please also use the opportunity and move 
nolibc.h to a more prominent place, like in tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h 
or so?

Thanks,

	Ingo

Re: [PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[Willy Tarreau]

On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 12:25:02PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
Could we please also use the opportunity and move 
> nolibc.h to a more prominent place, like in tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h 
> or so?

It's exactly what the last patch does, I followed your suggestion :-)

Willy

Re: [PATCH] tools headers: move the nolibc header from rcutorture to tools/include/nolibc/

[Ingo Molnar]

* Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu> wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 30, 2018 at 12:25:02PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Could we please also use the opportunity and move 
> > nolibc.h to a more prominent place, like in tools/include/nolibc/nolibc.h 
> > or so?
> 
> It's exactly what the last patch does, I followed your suggestion :-)

Silly me - I only looked at the series of patches and didn't see a file 
movement patch there :-)

Thanks,

	Ingo