Re: [LTP] Installing outside LTP source

Michal Simek
2009-06-01T07:13:58Z

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sunday 31 May 2009 15:27:47 Michal Simek wrote:
>
>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday 30 May 2009 10:28:48 Michal Simek wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thursday 28 May 2009 05:24:23 Michal Simek wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would to ask you if someone works or worked on moving LTP to Kbuild.
>>>>>>
>>>>> the Subject line doesnt really seem to line up with this question.
>>>>> what exactly do you want to do and why do you think Kbuild is the
>>>>> solution ? saying "let's switch to Kbuild!" without any rhyme or reason
>>>>> sounds like a lot of work for no gain.
>>>>>
>>>> I wanted to wrote two emails instead of one - that's why was there 2
>>>> different things.
>>>> 1. disable compilation "verbose" mode and turn on it with V=1.
>>>>
>>> meh. `make -s` seems to work fine enough for me. most people arent
>>> reviewing the output for warnings and similar issues, so i dont really
>>> see much point of having quiet output in LTP.
>>>
>> People don't do it because that warnings are hidden in huge log. It will
>> be good to run sparse too.
>>
>
> i dont think sparse is applicable. it is largely geared towards the policies
> employed in the kernel.
>
>
>>>> 2. Move all binaries outside of LTP source code O=/path
>>>>
>>> you mean out-of-tree compilation. you can use lndir to get the same
>>> functionality, but it isnt really an optimal method.
>>>
>>>
>>>> 3. I use only some parts of LTP for my testing and it will be good to
>>>> enable/disable just tests which you want to use.
>>>>
>>> you can run `make` in only the dirs you care about. how deep do you
>>> actually want to get ? having Kconfig entries for every single test
>>> (i.e. kernel/syscalls/{getsid,pipe}0{1,2} .....) is crazy.
>>>
>> Yes, I agree that make no sense to add all syscalls test for example to
>> Kconfig but I can imagine tests for noMMU as are currently wrote in
>> Makefile.
>>
>
> sounds a bit arbitrary. you and i may be interested in nommu, but what about
> other classifications of things people are interested in ? that'd lead to
> messy kbuild files where tests are arbitrary grouped and the resulting build
> system would be just as bad.
>

No. I am interested in MMU version and much more that noMMU one.
Paul J.Y. Lahaie added noMMU support to LTP and he excludes there some
tests.
Some of them make sense some not. Please imagine new guy come to use LTP
to test
his noMMU system and find that chmod, chown are exclude for example but
don't know why.
Is it mean that uclinux can't use chmod or I just can't run that test on
noMMU?
He will look to source and of course there isn't any description. Maybe
you are right
that we should create any doc file about uClinux usage or any sensible
solution.
Anyway there are a lot of tests which we could enable for uClinux
because only kernel syscalls folder in not enough,

The second things is relate with hush which you are solving at busybox
mailing list - which is out of topic here.
Thanks for that.

>
>> For example will be good for all to know why are some tests exclude for
>> noMMU.
>>
>
> i dont see how that's relevant to kbuild. that info should be documented
> regardless in the test case itself.
>
Or in Kconfig description.
>> If you look to runtest for testing description, make sense to me have
>> all that filenames as Kconfig option and enable/disable that tests.
>>
>
> ive never used/looked at runtest, sorry
>
Do you run every tests by hand on any simple script?
You haven't run command like this?
./runltp -q -f syscalls

>
>>>> 4. If is possible clean all Makefiles
>>>>
>>> dont really know what that means
>>>
>> this point depended on descriptions below. I think we talked about once
>> in past.
>>
>> There are a lot of additions like CFLAGS, LDLIBS.
>> CFLAGS += -I../../../../include -Wall
>> LDLIBS += -L../../../../lib -lltp
>>
>> I think that install and clean parts could be possible to clean too and
>> have Makefiles with
>> one or two lines like test-y +=test_name
>>
>> Is it possible to do with Kbuild? That the same question as I had in
>> previous email.
>>
>
> that can be done right now without any other issue. create a top level .mk
> file, define topdir in the specific Makefile, and then include it.
> topdir = ../../../..
> include $(topdir)/common.mk
>
> then the common.mk can setup common flags or create automatic clean targets
>

0k.
Michal

> -mike