Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: Add default testfiles for KVM selftests runner

From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Vipin Sharma <vipinsh@google.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvmarm@lists.linux.dev,
	kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	 linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, pbonzini@redhat.com,
	 anup@brainfault.org, borntraeger@linux.ibm.com,
	frankja@linux.ibm.com,  imbrenda@linux.ibm.com, maz@kernel.org,
	oliver.upton@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: selftests: Add default testfiles for KVM selftests runner
Date: Mon, 5 May 2025 15:57:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aBlCTfAlKOWG5orI@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250505190538.GA1168139.vipinsh@google.com>

On Mon, May 05, 2025, Vipin Sharma wrote:
> On 2025-04-30 10:01:29, Sean Christopherson wrote:
> > But, I do think we should commit the default.test files to the repository.  If
> > they're ephemeral, then several problems arise:
> > 
> >  1. For out-of-tree builds, the default.test files should arguably be placed in
> >     the OUTPUT directory.  But if/when we add curated testcases/, then we'll either
> >     end up with multiple testcases/ directories (source and output), or we'll have
> >     to copy testcases/ from the source to the output on a normal build, which is
> >     rather gross.  Or we'd need e.g. "make testcases", which is also gross, e.g.
> >     I don't want to have to run yet more commands just to execute tests.
> > 
> >  2. Generating default.test could overwrite a user-defined file.  That's firmly
> >     a user error, but at least if they default.test files are commited, the user
> >     will get a hint or three that they're doing things wrong.
> > 
> >  3. If the files aren't committed, then they probably should removed on "clean",
> >     which isn't the end of the world since they're trivially easy to generate,
> >     but it's kinda funky. 
> > 
> > So, what if we add this to auto-generate the files?  It's obviously wasteful since
> > the files will exist 99.9999999% of the time, but the overhead is completely
> > negligible.  The only concern I have is if this will do the wrong thing for some
> > build environments, i.e. shove the files in the wrong location.
> 
> We can get the current path of the Makefile.kvm by writing this at the top
> of the Makefile.kvm:
> 	MAKEFILE_DIR := $(dir $(realpath $(lastword $(MAKEFILE_LIST))))
> 
> Then MAKEFILE_DIR will have the source directory of Makfile.kvm and
> testcase will be in the same directory.
> 
> With this we can modify the below foreach you wrote by prefixing
> MAKEFILE_DIR to "testcases".
> 
> Does this alleviate concern regaring build environment?

Yeah, I think so.  FWIW, "concern" probably isn't the right word, more like "the
only thing I haven't thought much about".

-- 
kvm-riscv mailing list
kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kvm-riscv