Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1365503
| From | Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/9] selftest: sync: basic tests for sw_sync framework |
| Date | 2016-03-28 15:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <rhFIm-7PN-17@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <raOno-1of-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <raOnp-1of-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <rhDZT-6xZ-9@gated-at.bofh.it> <rhEVY-7c7-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 28 March 2016 at 13:20, Emilio López <emilio.lopez@collabora.co.uk> wrote: > Hi, > > El 28/03/16 a las 08:56, Emil Velikov escribió: >> >> Hi Emilio, >> >> On 9 March 2016 at 15:28, Emilio López <emilio.lopez@collabora.co.uk> >> wrote: >>> >>> These tests are based on the libsync test suite from Android. >>> This commit lays the ground for future tests, as well as includes >>> tests for a variety of basic allocation commands. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo Padovan <gustavo.padovan@collabora.co.uk> >>> Signed-off-by: Emilio López <emilio.lopez@collabora.co.uk> >>> --- >>> >> >>> tools/testing/selftests/sync/sync.h | 119 ++++++++++++++++++ >> >> Admittedly I know nothing about the kernel selftests although copying >> the UAPI header, seems to defeat the purpose of this exercise. >> Shouldn't one reuse the existing header ? It would even cause issues >> as the interface gets updated (iirc Gustavo changed the ioctl numbers >> and/or header name with latter series). > > > The problem is that one cannot use the system header without having built > and installed the kernel first, which is rather problematic for eg. > crosscompiling or virtualization. I discussed this with Gustavo and we > agreed that the best way forward would be to copy the interfaces, as > suggested by kernelnewbies' wiki[0]: > In the case of using a system header one can just `make headers_install' without building the kernel, as mentioned in the very same page ;-) Although I wasn't thinking that one should be using the header already available in tree. After all this series is not supposed to land before Gustavo's work, is it ? From a quick skim though the selftests, I cannot see cases where UAPI headers are copied/duplicated. > """ > The correct way to address this problem is to isolate the specific > interfaces that you need, e.g. a single header file that is patched in a new > kernel providing the ioctl numbers for a character device used by your > program. In your own program, add a copy of that source file, with a notice > that it should be kept in sync with new kernel versions. > """ My understanding of the article is that it refers to building user space programs that do _not_ live in the same tree as the kernel. Am I missing something ? Regards, Emil
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/9] selftest: sync: basic tests for sw_sync framework Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 14:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/9] selftest: sync: basic tests for sw_sync framework Emilio López <emilio.lopez@collabora.co.uk> - 2016-03-28 15:00 +0200
Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/9] selftest: sync: basic tests for sw_sync framework Emil Velikov <emil.l.velikov@gmail.com> - 2016-03-28 15:50 +0200
csiph-web