From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kselftest: Support nolibc
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 16:20:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZC7VLXGpB8PRdj12@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230405-kselftest-nolibc-v1-0-63fbcd70b202@kernel.org>
Hi Mark,
On Thu, Apr 06, 2023 at 02:56:28PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> At present the kselftest header can't be used with nolibc since it makes
> use of vprintf() which is not available in nolibc and seems like it would
> be inappropriate to implement given the minimal system requirements and
> environment intended for nolibc.
In fact we already have vfprintf(), and printf() is based on it, so
wouldn't it just be a matter of adding vprintf() that calls vfprintf()
for your case ? Maybe just something like this :
static int vprintf(const char *fmt, va_list args)
{
return vfprintf(stdout, fmt, args);
}
It's possible I'm missing something, but it's also possible you didn't
find vfprintf() which is why I prefer to raise my hand ;-)
> This has resulted in some open coded
> kselftests which use nolibc to test features that are supposed to be
> controlled via libc and therefore better exercised in an environment with
> no libc.
Yeah that's ugly. In nolibc-test we now have two build targets so that
we can more easily verify the compatibility between the default libc and
nolibc, so my recommendation would be to stick to a common subset of both
libcs, but not to rely on nolibc-specific stuff that could make tests
harder to debug.
Regards,
Willy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-04-06 14:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-06 13:56 [PATCH 0/2] kselftest: Support nolibc Mark Brown
2023-04-06 13:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Mark Brown
2023-04-06 13:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] kselftest/arm64: Convert za-fork to use kselftest.h Mark Brown
2023-04-06 14:20 ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2023-04-06 14:32 ` [PATCH 0/2] kselftest: Support nolibc Mark Brown
2023-04-06 16:22 ` Willy Tarreau
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=ZC7VLXGpB8PRdj12@1wt.eu \
--to=w@1wt.eu \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=will@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