Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 3 Nov 2023 14:00:46 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 11/11] selftests: error out if kernel header files are not yet built | From | David Hildenbrand <> |
| |
On 03.11.23 13:59, David Hildenbrand wrote: > On 03.11.23 13:46, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> On Fri, Nov 03, 2023 at 01:22:54PM +0100, David Hildenbrand wrote: >>> On 03.11.23 13:16, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 12:16:37AM -0700, John Hubbard wrote: >>>>> As per a discussion with Muhammad Usama Anjum [1], the following is how >>>>> one is supposed to build selftests: >>>>> >>>>> make headers && make -C tools/testing/selftests/mm >>>>> >>>>> Change the selftest build system's lib.mk to fail out with a helpful >>>>> message if that prerequisite "make headers" has not been done yet. >>>>> >>>> >>>> NAK NAK NAK >>>> >>>> This now means I can no longer run selftests, I thank you very much! :-/ >>>> >>>> root@spr:/usr/src/linux-2.6# make O=defconfig-build/ -j64 >>>> make[1]: Entering directory '/usr/src/linux-2.6/defconfig-build' >>>> *** >>>> *** The source tree is not clean, please run 'make mrproper' >>>> *** in /usr/src/linux-2.6 >>>> >>>> >>>> I've always done: >>>> >>>> cd tools/testing/selftests/x86; make >>>> >>>> and that has always worked >>>> >>>> Now I can't bloody well build *any* selftest or risk not being able to >>>> do builds. >>> >>> This change landed in 6.5, no? And 6.6 was just released. Just curious why >>> you notice that now. >> >> Dunno, last time I edited the selftests and needed to recompile was a >> few weeks ago. > > Okay. the question is if your workflow can be easily adjusted, or if we > can improve that header handling as a whole. > > The problem I had with this recently: just because we did a "make > headers" once in a git tree doesn't mean that it is still up-to-date. > > So once some selftest changes showed up that require newer headers, > building the selftests again fails without a hint that another round of > "make headers" would be required.
To clarify: maybe some kind of a warning would be better, ideally that the headers might be outdated and that another "make headers" would be required in case there are any build errors.
-- Cheers,
David / dhildenb
| |