From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: "Thomas Weißschuh" <linux@weissschuh.net>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: only run constructor tests on nolibc
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025 10:39:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250216093940.GA2192@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250212-nolibc-test-constructor-v1-1-c963875b3da4@weissschuh.net>
On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 07:01:01PM +0100, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> The nolibc testsuite can be run against other libcs to test for
> interoperability. Some aspects of the constructor execution are not
> standardized and musl does not provide all tested feature, for one it
> does not provide arguments to the constructors, anymore?
>
> Skip the constructor tests on non-nolibc configurations.
I'm not much surprised, I've always avoided arguments in my use of
constructors due to a lack of portability. However the patch disables
all constructors tests, while I'm seeing that the linkage_test version
does not make use of arguments, though there is an implied expectation
that they're executed in declaration order, which is not granted.
I'm wondering if we shouldn't make the tests more robust:
1) explicitly set linkage_test_constructor_test_value to zero in the
declaration, because here it's not set so we have no guarantee
(we're not in the kernel)
2) only add values to check for cumulated values (e.g. |1 in const1,
|2 in const2) and verify that the result is properly 3
3) make the argument test add a distinct value (|4) so that when
testing it's instantly obvious which test was not called.
And indeed, we can disable the tests we know fail on other libcs and
even split that by feature (e.g. test that at least one constructor
was called using !=0, that all non-arg ones were called via &3 == 3,
and that the args were passed via &4==4). That would allow to further
refine the tests if desired so that we can keep the differences in mind.
In any case all of this can also be done later, and I'm obviously fine
with this immediate adjustement.
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
Acked-by: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
Willy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-16 9:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-12 18:01 [PATCH] selftests/nolibc: only run constructor tests on nolibc Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-16 9:39 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2025-02-17 21:24 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-02-22 9:38 ` Willy Tarreau
2025-02-25 9:37 ` Thomas Weißschuh
2025-03-01 11:07 ` Willy Tarreau
2025-03-02 21:56 ` 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=20250216093940.GA2192@1wt.eu \
--to=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@weissschuh.net \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
/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