Re: [PATCH 1/1] ltp: upgrade 20250530 -> 20250930

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Sun, 2025-10-12 at 22:08 +0200, Petr Vorel wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <petr.vorel@gmail.com>
> ---
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm sorry, I planned to test this time, but it failed. Any hint what's
> wrong? Or can anybody test this patch?
> 
> $ . oe-init-build-env
> 
> .../build $ bitbake ltp
> ERROR: Error importing OE modules: module 'bb.parse' has no attribute
> 'vardepsexclude'
> ERROR: Unable to parse
> /home/pvorel/install/src/openembedded/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/ast.py
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File
>   "/home/pvorel/install/src/openembedded/bitbake/lib/bb/parse/ast.py",
>   line 372, in eval
>       layerid, fragment_name = f.split('/', 1)
> 	      ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 		  ValueError: not enough values to unpack (expected 2, got 1)
> 
> FYI I also plan to get rid of some patches posted.

Are you setting OE_FRAGMENTS to something in a config file? It
shouldn't traceback like this so that is a bug but something is
triggering it...

> * 0001-Add-__clear_cache-declaration-for-clang.patch
> It's wrong, I'd like to replace it with:
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ltp/list/?series=477319&state=*
> 
> * 0001-syscalls-semctl08-Skip-semctl08-when-__USE_TIME64_RE.patch
> I posted a review, hopefully we get a feedback from other developers
> soon.
> 
> * 0001-Remove-OOM-tests-from-runtest-mm.patch
> Is it really needed to drop these tests?
> 
> BTW for those who run LTP: kirk might be interesting tool to use:
> https://github.com/linux-test-project/kirk

I did send some questions and had some discussion on kirk a while ago.
Quite simply, it isn't useful/interesting to Yocto Project.

What we want to test with is our images and our kernel, as we build it.
kirk, as far as I understand it has gone a different route where there
isn't really any userspace left and it simply tests against a kernel
binary. We'd no longer be testing our build artefacts but some more
artificial construct.

We're trying to test what we build. You're trying to test the kernel
for regressions. They're two different things.

I totally understand why you've gone that direction with kirk but I
also did spell out at the time that it wasn't something which really
fits in with the way we run tests, or what we actually aim to test. I
was told at the time that basically, nobody is interested in what we
want/do.

> We also bundle it in LTP as a submodule:
> https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/blob/master/.gitmodules
> 
> It's also in pypi:
> https://pypi.org/project/kirk/
> 
> I see in meta/lib/oeqa/runtime/cases/ltp.py the deprecated
> /opt/ltp/runltp is still being used. We want to remove it (not sure
> when, but it will happen sooner or later). Any change somebody would
> submit a patch to switch to kirk?

It is more likely that when you drop runltp, we'll just have to drop
ltp. Sorry :(. I did explain this at while ago :/.

I did also flag the issue to our own wider community but nobody has
stepped up to do anything about it. I've way too many other things to
work on so it is very unlikely I have any time to look at it.

Cheers,

Richard