Linux Kernel Selftest development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Thomas Weißschuh" <linux@weissschuh.net>
To: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,  linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] selftests/nolibc: rename Makefile
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2025 10:34:38 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20db87b0-05ff-476b-a58f-d0945bfacf20@t-8ch.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250621041421.GA26603@1wt.eu>

On 2025-06-21 06:14:21+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Thomas,
> 
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2025 at 11:39:32PM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > The nolibc tests are not real kselftests, they work differently and
> > provide a different interface. Users trying to use them like real
> > selftests may be confused and the tests are not executed by CI systems.
> > 
> > To make space for an integration with the kselftest framework, move the
> > custom tests out of the way.
> > The custom tests are still useful to keep as they provide functionality
> > not provided by kselftests.
> 
> I'm wondering, what prevents us from merging the new rules into the
> current makefile instead of renaming it, especially considering the
> fact that we initially took care of not confiscating the "all" target ?

We'll have conflicts around CFLAGS, the nolibc-test target and probably
other things. It will also make everything harder to understand and may
break unexpectedly in the future.

> I'm asking because: 
> 
>   $ make -f Makefile.nolibc help
> 
> is clearly less convenient and intuitive than:
> 
>   $ make help

Is your issue specifically with the help target?
We should be able to show the help message from the main Makefile with a
hint to the Makefile.nolibc.

Another, more general, possibility would be to move the special Makefile
to tools/testing/nolibc/ and keep only the selftest parts in
tools/testing/selftests/nolibc/.

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-21  8:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-20 21:39 [PATCH 0/4] selftests/nolibc: integrate with kselftests Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20 21:39 ` [PATCH 1/4] selftests/nolibc: drop implicit defconfig executions Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20 21:39 ` [PATCH 2/4] selftests/nolibc: split out CFLAGS logic Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-20 21:39 ` [PATCH 3/4] selftests/nolibc: rename Makefile Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-21  4:14   ` Willy Tarreau
2025-06-21  8:34     ` Thomas Weißschuh [this message]
2025-06-21  8:47       ` Willy Tarreau
2025-06-23 20:18         ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-06-23 20:24           ` Willy Tarreau
2025-06-20 21:39 ` [PATCH 4/4] selftests/nolibc: integrate with kselftests Thomas Weißschuh

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20db87b0-05ff-476b-a58f-d0945bfacf20@t-8ch.de \
    --to=linux@weissschuh.net \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=w@1wt.eu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox