Re: [kvm-unit-tests PATCH 3/4] build: Make build output pretty

Thomas Huth
2024-06-12T10:32:15Z

On 05/06/2024 02.38, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> On Mon Jun 3, 2024 at 6:56 PM AEST, Andrew Jones wrote:
>> On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 10:26:50AM GMT, Thomas Huth wrote:
>>> On 02/06/2024 14.25, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
>>>> Unless make V=1 is specified, silence make recipe echoing and print
>>>> an abbreviated line for major build steps.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> Makefile | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>>> arm/Makefile.common | 7 +++++++
>>>> powerpc/Makefile.common | 11 +++++++----
>>>> riscv/Makefile | 5 +++++
>>>> s390x/Makefile | 18 +++++++++++++++++-
>>>> scripts/mkstandalone.sh | 2 +-
>>>> x86/Makefile.common | 5 +++++
>>>> 7 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> The short lines look superfluous in verbose mode, e.g.:
>>>
>>> [OBJCOPY] s390x/memory-verify.bin
>>> objcopy -O binary s390x/memory-verify.elf s390x/memory-verify.bin
>>>
>>> Could we somehow suppress the echo lines in verbose mode, please?
>>>
>>> For example in the SLOF project, it's done like this:
>>>
>>> https://gitlab.com/slof/slof/-/blob/master/make.rules?ref_type=heads#L48
>>>
>>> By putting the logic into $CC and friends, you also don't have to add
>>> "@echo" statements all over the place.
>>
>> And I presume make will treat the printing and compiling as one unit, so
>> parallel builds still get the summary above the error messages when
>> compilation fails. The way this patch is now a parallel build may show
>> the summary for the last successful build and then error messages for
>> a build that hasn't output its summary yet, which can be confusing.
>>
>> So I agree that something more like SLOF's approach would be better.
>
> Hmm... kbuild type commands is a pretty big patch. I like it though.
> Thoughts?

Looks pretty complex to me ... do we really need this complexity in the
k-u-t? If not, I think I'd rather prefer to go with a more simple approach
like the one from SLOF.

Thomas