From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Monjalon Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] mk: add new test-run make rule Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:44:33 +0100 Message-ID: <2458783.cUhEIUrdmi@xps13> References: <20170214151326.7554-1-ferruh.yigit@intel.com> <371817936.VaZMuq7BCX@xps13> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Bruce Richardson , John McNamara , Keith Wiles To: Ferruh Yigit Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com (mail-wm0-f42.google.com [74.125.82.42]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3494C5A44 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 11:44:35 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-wm0-f42.google.com with SMTP id v186so62979187wmd.0 for ; Thu, 16 Feb 2017 02:44:35 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" 2017-02-16 10:21, Ferruh Yigit: > On 2/16/2017 9:26 AM, Thomas Monjalon wrote: > > 2017-02-15 15:26, Ferruh Yigit: > >> --- a/mk/rte.sdkroot.mk > >> +++ b/mk/rte.sdkroot.mk > >> @@ -92,8 +92,8 @@ default: all > >> config showconfigs showversion showversionum: > >> $(Q)$(MAKE) -f $(RTE_SDK)/mk/rte.sdkconfig.mk $@ > >> > >> -.PHONY: test fast_test ring_test mempool_test perf_test coverage > >> -test fast_test ring_test mempool_test perf_test coverage: > >> +.PHONY: test test-run fast_test ring_test mempool_test perf_test coverage > >> +test test-run fast_test ring_test mempool_test perf_test coverage: > >> $(Q)$(MAKE) -f $(RTE_SDK)/mk/rte.sdktest.mk $@ > > > > "test" is a shortcut for build + basic tests. > > I think test-run can be better named. It runs all the basic tests registered > > in autotests. "test-all" would be wrong. What about "test-basic"? > > Right, "test-basic" matches more to existing rules (test-fast, > test-perf, ..), all has hidden "run" action implied, I will use > "test-basic" if there is no objection. > > My concerns is "test-basic" "running basic tests without compilation" > may not be obvious for a newcomer. > Should I add a line to "make help" for "test" and "test-*" rules? > > Like: > test Compile tests and run basic unit tests > test-* Run specific subset of the unit tests Yes it looks good.