From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A13A2C433EF for ; Mon, 23 May 2022 19:56:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230462AbiEWT4e (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2022 15:56:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43528 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231177AbiEWT4Z (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 May 2022 15:56:25 -0400 Received: from 1wt.eu (wtarreau.pck.nerim.net [62.212.114.60]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A918413CDA for ; Mon, 23 May 2022 12:56:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from willy@localhost) by pcw.home.local (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 24NJu5ra013066; Mon, 23 May 2022 21:56:05 +0200 Date: Mon, 23 May 2022 21:56:05 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Linus Torvalds Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Kernel Team Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] nolibc changes for v5.19 Message-ID: <20220523195605.GA13032@1wt.eu> References: <20220520182428.GA3791250@paulmck-ThinkPad-P17-Gen-1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Linus, On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 11:42:48AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2022 at 11:24 AM Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > This pull request adds a number of library functions and splits this > > library into multiple files. > > Well, this is annoying. > > You add the rule to test and install this, and "make help" will list > "nolibc" as a target, but that is not actually true at all. > > So what's the appropriate way to actually test this pull somehow? > > I'm guessing it's along the lines of > > make ARCH=x86 nolibc_headers > > in the tools directory, but then I got bored and decided I need to > just continue the merge window. > > I've pulled this, but it all makes me go "Hmm, I'd have liked to maybe > even build test it". I did. I must confess I'm embarrassed now because when I added the entries there, exactly in order to reuse what was in place, I found it a bit tricky to launch the tests, but after that I felt OK with it. Now it's been a quite some time now and I don't remember the exact way to trigger the tests there, so it's likely that I didn't leave enough info in the commit messages :-( Let me have a look and figure again how to start the tests. Sorry about that, Willy