From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeremy Kerr Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 v3] selftests: Add tests for efivarfs Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2013 18:05:52 +0800 Message-ID: <5114CE00.6050307@ozlabs.org> References: <1360162088.142733.191120808822.0.gpush@pecola> <1360162088.143076.913706486688.1.gpush@pecola> <20130207151333.f01d415c.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130207151333.f01d415c.akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org> Sender: linux-efi-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-efi-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, Matt Fleming , Lingzhu Xiang , Dave Young List-Id: linux-efi@vger.kernel.org Hi Andrew, Thanks for taking a look at these. >> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ >> -TARGETS = breakpoints kcmp mqueue vm cpu-hotplug memory-hotplug >> +TARGETS = breakpoints kcmp mqueue vm cpu-hotplug memory-hotplug efivarfs > > bah. This sort of Makefile construct is a wonderful source of patch > rejects and fixups. I'll covert this to > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/Makefile~a > +++ a/tools/testing/selftests/Makefile > @@ -1,4 +1,11 @@ > -TARGETS = breakpoints epoll kcmp mqueue vm cpu-hotplug memory-hotplug efivarfs > +TARGETS = breakpoints > +TARGETS += epoll > +TARGETS += kcmp > +TARGETS += mqueue > +TARGETS += vm > +TARGETS += cpu-hotplug > +TARGETS += memory-hotplug > +TARGETS += efivarfs Much better, thanks. I'd already had a collision with the epoll tests... > I'll do this for now: > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/efivarfs/Makefile~selftests-add-tests-for-efivarfs-fix > +++ a/tools/testing/selftests/efivarfs/Makefile > @@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ test_objs = open-unlink > all: $(test_objs) > > run_tests: all > - @./efivarfs.sh || echo "efivarfs selftests: [FAIL]" > + @/bin/sh ./efivarfs.sh || echo "efivarfs selftests: [FAIL]" > > clean: > rm -f $(test_objs) > > but I'm not sure I did it right :( efivarfs.sh requires bash currently, so we'll need to call this explicitly: + @/bin/bash ./efivarfs.sh || echo "efivarfs selftests: [FAIL]" Is this okay? > The general ruleset for selftests is: do as much as you can if you're not > root and don't take too long and don't break the build on any > architecture and don't cause the top-level "make run_tests" to fail if > your feature is unconfigured. Ah, good stuff to know. I'll send a patch adding this info to Documentation/ too. > Does this code pass all that? It should, yes: * all test requires root at present, as all efivarfs files are only writable by root * the built binaries doesn't use anything more than basic C, so should build fine wherever we have gcc. * efivarfs.sh will skip all tests if efivarfs is not mounted However, the tests expose a bug at the moment, so run_tests will fail. Matt will have that fixed soon though :) Cheers, Jeremy