From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Subject: Re: [Bug Report] - kselftest build fails if output directory is first level sub-directory References: From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 15:39:20 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit List-ID: To: Masahiro Yamada , Muhammad Usama Anjum Cc: Michal Marek , Nick Desaulniers , Shuah Khan , KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK , Linux Kbuild mailing list , LKML , "kernelci@groups.io" , Shuah Khan On 5/22/22 11:15 AM, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > On Sat, May 21, 2022 at 3:44 PM Muhammad Usama Anjum > wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> kselftest can be built using the kernel's top most Makefile without >> using kselftest's Makefile directly. But there is bug in the top most >> Makefile. The build fails if the specified output directory is first >> level sub-directory. Here is a example to reproduce this bug: >> >> make kselftest-all O=build >> >> "The Make is working in a wrong directory, that is why the relative path >> does not work." Masahiro Yamada. Feel free to fix it if someone pin the bug. >> >> It should be noted that the build works in some other combinations: >> make kselftest-all (works) >> make kselftest-all O=/tmp (works) >> make kselftest-all O=build/build2 (works) >> >> My unsuccessful attempt to fix this bug can be found here: >> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20220223191016.1658728-1-usama.anjum@collabora.com/ >> >> Thanks, >> Muhammad Usama Anjum > > > This problem starts from the bad design of the kselftest framework. > I did some research before. I think I can fix the root cause but > currently I do not have enough time to do it. > > > KBUILD_ABS_SRCTREE is a user-interface to request > Kbuild to use the absolute path. > If it is forced in the top Makefile, users have no way to > negate it. > It is true that using the absolute path is a quick work-around > because you do not need to care about the current working directory. > > If you insist on it, just go ahead. It is just two line changes. > Once the issue is fixed in a better way, your patch can be reverted easily. > > > Why don't we work on fixing it the wright way? I would rather go that route than using short rem fixes. Usama, would you be interested in working on a proper fix as recommended by Masahiro? thanks, -- Shuah