Re: [PATCH 05/15] t/Makefile: optimize chainlint self-test
flat view
From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <hidden>
Date: 2021-12-16 13:22:44
On Mon, Dec 13 2021, Fabian Stelzer wrote:
On 13.12.2021 09:27, Eric Sunshine wrote:quoted
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 5:22 AM Fabian Stelzer [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 13.12.2021 01:30, Eric Sunshine wrote:quoted
check-chainlint: + sed -e '/^# LINT: /d' $(patsubst %,chainlint/%.test,$(CHAINLINTTESTS)) >'$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/tests && \ + cat $(patsubst %,chainlint/%.expect,$(CHAINLINTTESTS)) >'$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/expect && \ + $(CHAINLINT) '$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/tests >'$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/actual && \ + diff -u '$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/expect '$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/actualIf I read this right you are relying on the order of the .test & .expect files to match. I did something similar in a test prereq which resulted in a bug when setting the test_output_dir to something residing in /dev/shm, since the order of files in /dev/shm is reversed (at least on some platforms). Even though this should work as is I could see this leading to a similar bug in the future.It's not seen in the patch context, but earlier in the file we have: CHAINLINTTESTS = $(sort $(...,$(wildcard chainlint/*.test))) which provides stability via `sort`, thus ensures that the order of the ".test" and ".expect" match. I think that addresses your concern (unless I misunderstand your observation).Yes, thats what i meant. I didn't realize $CHAINLINTTESTS is already the sorted glob. Thanks for clarifying. Personally i find the initial for loop variant to be the most readable. Ævars makefile targets could be very nice too, but especially: +$(BUILT_CHAINLINTTESTS): | .build/chainlint +$(BUILT_CHAINLINTTESTS): .build/%.actual: % + $(CHAINLINT) <$< | \ + sed -e '/^# LINT: /d' >$@ && \ + diff -u $(basename $<).expect $@ i find very hard to grasp :/ I have no idea what is going on here: `<$< |` ?
It's a minor point, and not relevant to this series proceeding.
But just FWIW I think both of you are wrong about the potenital for a
".test" and ".expect" bug here.
I.e. yes the CHAINLINTTESTS variable is sorted:
CHAINLINTTESTS = $(sort $(...,$(wildcard chainlint/*.test)))
But in Eric's patch we just have this relevant to this concern of
(paraphrased) "would it not be sorted break it?":
+ sed -e '/^# LINT: /d' $(patsubst %,chainlint/%.test,$(CHAINLINTTESTS)) >'$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/tests && \
+ cat $(patsubst %,chainlint/%.expect,$(CHAINLINTTESTS)) >'$(CHAINLINTTMP_SQ)'/expect && \
So it doesn't matter if it's sorted our not.
I.e. we've got {A,B,C}.{test,expect} files in a directory, and we're
constructing a "A.test" and "A.expect" via "$(patsubst)".
So if it's "A B C", "C B A", "A C B" etc. won't matter. We'll always get
".test" files corresponding to ".expect".
If it's not sorted we'll get failure output in an unexpected order, but
it won't matter to whether we detect a failure or not.