On 12/31/2014 07:31 PM, Tim Bird wrote:

On 12/24/2014 08:27 AM, Shuah Khan wrote:

quoted

Add a new make target to enable installing test. This target
installs test in the kselftest install location and add to the
kselftest script to run the test. Install target can be run
only from top level kernel source directory.

Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <redacted>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/size/Makefile | 12 +++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/size/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/size/Makefile
index 04dc25e..bb7113b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/size/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/size/Makefile

@@ -1,12 +1,22 @@
 CC = $(CROSS_COMPILE)gcc
 
+TEST_STR = ./get_size || echo get_size selftests: [FAIL]
+
 all: get_size
 
 get_size: get_size.c
 	$(CC) -static -ffreestanding -nostartfiles -s $< -o $@
 
+install:
+ifdef INSTALL_KSFT_PATH
+	install ./get_size $(INSTALL_KSFT_PATH)
+	@echo "$(TEST_STR)" >> $(KSELFTEST)
+else
+	@echo Run make kselftest_install in top level source directory
+endif
+
 run_tests: all
-	./get_size
+	@$(TEST_STR)
 
 clean:
 	$(RM) get_size

The install phase is desperately needed for usage of kselftest in
cross-target situations (applicable to almost all embedded).  So this
is great stuff.

Thanks.

I worked a bit on isolating the install stuff to a makefile include file.
This allows simplifying some of the sub-level Makefiles a bit, and allowing
control of some of the install and run logic in less places.

This is still a work in progress, but before I got too far along, I wanted
to post it for people to provide feedback.  A couple of problems cropped
up that are worth discussing, IMHO.

1) I think it should be a requirement that each test has a single
"main" program to execute to run the tests.  If multiple tests are supported
or more flexibility is desired for additional arguments, or that sort of
thing, then that's fine, but the automated script builder should be able
to run just a single program or script to have things work.  This also
makes things more consistent.  In the case of the firmware test, I created
a single fw_both.sh script to do this, instead of having two separate
blocks in the kselftest.sh script.

It is a good goal for individual tests to use a main program to run
tests, even though, I would not make it a requirement. I would like to
leave that decision up to the individual test writer.

2) I've added a CROSS_INSTALL variable, which can call an arbitrary program
to place files on the target system (rather than just calling 'install').
In my case, I'd use my own 'ttc cp' command, which I can extend as necessary
to put things on a remote machine.  This works for a single directory,
but things get dicier with sub-directory trees full of files (like
the ftrace test uses.)

If additional items need to be installed to the target, then maybe a setup
program should be used, rather than just copying files.

3) Some of the scripts were using /bin/bash to execute them, rather
than rely on the interpreter line in the script itself (and having
the script have executable privileges).  Is there a reason for this?
I modified a few scripts to be executable, and got rid of the
explicit execution with /bin/bash.

Probably no reason other than the choice made by the test writer.
It could be cleaned up and made consistent, however, I would see
this as a separate enhancement type work that could be done on its
own and not include it in the install work.

The following is just a start...  Let me know if this direction looks
OK, and I'll finish this up.  The main item to look at is
kselftest.include file.  Note that these patches are based on Shuah's
series - but if you want to use these ideas I can rebase them onto
mainline, and break them out per test sub-level like Shuah did.

One of the reasons I picked install target approach is to enable the
feature by extending the existing run_tests support. This way we will
have the feature available quickly. Once that is supported, we can work
on evolving to a generic approach to use the include file approach, as
the changes you are proposing are based on the the series I sent out,
and makes improvements to it.

kselftest.include file approach could work for several tests and tests
that can't use the generic could add their own install support.

I propose evolving to a generic kselftest.include as the second step in
evolving the install feature. Can I count on you do the work and update
the tests to use kselftest.include, CROSS_INSTALL variable support?

thanks,
-- Shuah


Shuah Khan
Sr. Linux Kernel Developer
Open Source Innovation Group
Samsung Research America (Silicon Valley)
shuahkh@osg.samsung.com | (970) 217-8978