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 Received: from aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57C76C7115B for ; Thu, 19 Jun 2025 11:56:14 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] meta/meta-selftest: add selftest-hello-mod recipe To: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org From: "Dixit Parmar" X-Originating-Location: Pune, Maharashtra, IN (223.233.81.81) X-Originating-Platform: Windows Chrome 137 User-Agent: GROUPS.IO Web Poster MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2025 04:56:05 -0700 References: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <22191.1750334165882624180@lists.openembedded.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="o4HkCPngCRMUrwegS0xg" List-Id: X-Webhook-Received: from li982-79.members.linode.com [45.33.32.79] by aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org with HTTPS for ; Thu, 19 Jun 2025 11:56:14 -0000 X-Groupsio-URL: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/219072 --o4HkCPngCRMUrwegS0xg Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 05:10 PM, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: >=20 > On Thu Jun 19, 2025 at 7:56 AM CEST, Dixit Parmar via > lists.openembedded.org wrote: >=20 >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 10:15 AM, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote: >>=20 >>=20 >>> On Mon Jun 9, 2025 at 3:41 PM CEST, Dixit Parmar via >>> lists.openembedded.org wrote: >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> Kernel module specific oe test cases requires a test kernel >>>> module package to work with. Added selftest-hello-mod >>>> derived from meta-skeleton/recipes-kernel/hello-mod. >>>>=20 >>>> Signed-off-by: Dixit Parmar >>>> --- >>>=20 >>> Thanks or your patch. >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>=20 >>>> +S =3D "${WORKDIR}/hello-mod" >>>=20 >>> This will trigger an error if some patches in master-next are merged, >>> you can rebase on master-next to see the error. The hello-mod recipe of >>> meta-skeleton was also updated accordingly. >>=20 >> Do you mean I should take the latest reference from master-next for the >> meta-skeleton/hello-mod to meta-selftest? >=20 > All I can say for sure is we cannot take both the series from Alexander > and your patch as-is. >=20 > So as I believe the said series is likely to be merged, I would indeed > suggest to modify your patch accordingly, and this can be done by taking > the last version of meta-skeleton/hello-mod. But again, I'm not the one > deciding what gets merged, so I cannot be sure if and when it will be > merged. Understood. A failure was reported with the previous version of this patch,= where the .bb file was missing the WORKDIR-related changes for ${S} as it = was directly taken from the meta-skeleton/hello-mod. Now, to fix that, I ha= ve incorporated the solution this way. do you think this will give errors t= oo? Pls don't misunderstand me, I get your point of rebasing to the latest = meta-skeleton as reference but I just want to understand if this will get f= ailed or not. because the said master-next patch sets are still yet to get = merged. >=20 > -- > Mathieu Dubois-Briand, Bootlin > Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering > https://bootlin.com --o4HkCPngCRMUrwegS0xg Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 05:10 PM, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote:
On Thu Jun 19, 2025 at 7:56 AM CEST, Dixit Parmar via lists.ope= nembedded.org wrote:
On Thu, Jun 19, 2025 at 10:15 AM, Mathieu Dubois-Briand wrote:<= br />
On Mon Jun 9, 2025 at 3:41 PM CEST, Dixit Parmar via
lists= .openembedded.org wrote:

Kernel module specific oe test cases requires a test kernel
module package to work with. Added selftest-hello-mod
derived from m= eta-skeleton/recipes-kernel/hello-mod.

Signed-off-by: Dixit Parm= ar <dixitparmar19@gmail.com>
---
Thanks or your patch.


+S =3D "${WORKDIR}/hello-mod"
This will trigger an error if some patches in master-next are merged,
= you can rebase on master-next to see the error. The hello-mod recipe of
meta-skeleton was also updated accordingly.
Do you mean I should take the latest reference from master-next for the met= a-skeleton/hello-mod to meta-selftest?
All I can say for sure is we cannot take both the series from Alexander
and your patch as-is.

So as I believe the said series is likel= y to be merged, I would indeed
suggest to modify your patch accordingl= y, and this can be done by taking
the last version of meta-skeleton/he= llo-mod. But again, I'm not the one
deciding what gets merged, so I ca= nnot be sure if and when it will be
merged.
Understood. A failure was reported with the previous version of this patch,= where the .bb file was missing the WORKDIR-related changes for ${S} as it = was directly taken from the meta-skeleton/hello-mod. Now, to fix that, I ha= ve incorporated the solution this way. do you think this will give errors t= oo? Pls don't misunderstand me, I get your point of rebasing to the latest = meta-skeleton as reference but I just want to understand if this will get f= ailed or not. because the said master-next patch sets are still yet to get = merged.
--
Mathieu Dubois-Briand, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and= Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com
--o4HkCPngCRMUrwegS0xg--