From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7646C2BB48 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:54:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 767CA23975 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 15:54:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728125AbgLQPyT (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:54:19 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49458 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726595AbgLQPyS (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 10:54:18 -0500 Received: from mail-io1-xd2b.google.com (mail-io1-xd2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B047C0617A7 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 07:53:38 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-io1-xd2b.google.com with SMTP id t8so27947658iov.8 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 07:53:38 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linuxfoundation.org; s=google; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1tS/TPZAajsb6a4c9RGCrJLAfHltUkaFmVEdRYEivFw=; b=SB3dU4WyB1PXusFJSVHyaDGab5FNdkiftmzo1JGqFGpxCsRHPYqHdndiCTPIfpyAoA dZavB6mNbbXhvbdmY/9ftV0QOmkMdFayEvq7NSre/oLvfElDLFyZmo7ETmkSiCnjkKSo hqEegmshqqPRw0FO9cwVBmlXxQvHe5n6xV5a0= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1tS/TPZAajsb6a4c9RGCrJLAfHltUkaFmVEdRYEivFw=; b=OiDVSVGAomIqZdzNTexw4pmAYpbIUHhR/Qob9xbNe+hzjR4QvFtSbEmgmc88h5cnis Arr1ZXtLE+xXms5U+m/ujN76izj/nWWj7BvjoWBcYtctvIDt109Jf0askf3I5SB7PD+L PG/a1KKAJs48zm7TDH2Zv97IrOZOsVAX+0KUiCljstM8Y1KWqcKmGMWcwUfXFvajMGbC m4PmnFXYHCB51tK6L6Jp28NvdVbVALlWvbp5r7CXHegJs6OTGXDb2RDeUDcSo+cs1CCp ynHO8rgKUM+0un+E/DQoBsJAfCx9IjMDduVsXPPohSXYk+nV2IERbTpA6eCR2beBt1ze PkoA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533uQ6ERdwxlseMckCPEek0Y4NIQhBlRk8QwZy/qzr3uhYdbHrMV 9lXqDnToAx+IMwmdOk7F+fr7iw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwFKs72LIIAoNy8AlcxOBj2qkgjalhkB41+xRe9ghJ6Iq6ypq8oDxfJBkTODIta16gtRk8+Tg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6638:83:: with SMTP id v3mr47713212jao.106.1608220417790; Thu, 17 Dec 2020 07:53:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from [192.168.1.112] (c-24-9-64-241.hsd1.co.comcast.net. [24.9.64.241]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j65sm3551569ilg.53.2020.12.17.07.53.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 17 Dec 2020 07:53:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests: Skip BPF seftests by default To: Mark Brown , Seth Forshee Cc: Shuah Khan , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Daniel Diaz , Veronika Kabatova , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Guillaume Tucker , Kevin Hilman , Shuah Khan References: <20201210185233.28091-1-broonie@kernel.org> <20201217130735.GA4708@sirena.org.uk> From: Shuah Khan Message-ID: <94010653-0cb3-d804-7410-a571480d6db2@linuxfoundation.org> Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 08:53:36 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20201217130735.GA4708@sirena.org.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On 12/17/20 6:07 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 04:05:58PM -0600, Seth Forshee wrote: >> On Thu, Dec 10, 2020 at 06:52:33PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> as part of the wider kselftest build by specifying SKIP_TARGETS, >>> including setting an empty SKIP_TARGETS to build everything. They can >>> also continue to build the BPF selftests individually in cases where >>> they are specifically focused on BPF. > >> Why not just remove the line which adds bpf to TARGETS? This has the >> same effect, but doesn't require an emtpy SKIP_TARGETS to run them. We >> have testing scripts which use 'make TARGETS=bpf ...' which will have to >> be updated, and I doubt we are the only ones. > I would prefer leaving bpf in the main Makefile TARGETS. This will be useful to users that have their systems setup for bpf builds. >> I also feel like this creates confusing semantics around SKIP_TARGETS. >> If I don't supply a value then I don't get the bpf selftests, but then >> if I try to use SKIP_TARGETS to skip some other test suddenly I do get >> them. That's counterintuitive. > > That's what I did first, it's also messy just differently. If you > don't add bpf to TARGETS then if you do what's needed to get it building > it becomes inconvenient to run it as part of running everything else at > the top level since you need to enumerate all the targets. It felt like > skipping is what we're actually doing here and it seems like those > actively working with BPF will be used to having to update things in > their environment. People who start using SKIP_TARGETS are *probably* > going to find out about it from the Makefile anyway so will see the > default that's there. > > Fundamentally having such demanding build dependencies is always going > to result in some kind of mess, it's just where we push it. > >> I also wanted to point out that the net/test_bpf.sh selftest requires >> having the test_bpf module from the bpf selftest build. So when the bpf >> selftests aren't built this test is guaranteed to fail. Though it would >> be nice if the net selftests didn't require building the bpf self tests >> in order to pass. > > Right, that's a separate issue - the net tests should really skip that > if they don't have BPF, as we do for other runtime detectable > dependencies. It's nowhere near as severe as failing to build though. > Correct. This has to be handled as a run-time dependency check and skip instead of fail. thanks, -- Shuah