On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 06:00:23PM -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> On 05.12.2006 [10:52:03 +1100], David Gibson wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 04, 2006 at 03:39:09PM -0800, Nishanth Aravamudan wrote:
> > > It was noted recently that checking for a hugetlbfs mountpoint in the
> > > run_tests.sh can lead to a few issues (spaces in /proc/mounts, for
> > > instance), which are hard to work around. Instead, make use of the
> > > library's utilities via a small helper program which should provide
> > > greater safety.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> <snip>
>
> > > ALLTESTS = $(foreach DIR,$(OBJDIRS),$(TESTS:%=$(DIR)/%))
> > > +ALLHELPERS = $(foreach DIR,$(OBJDIRS),$(HELPERS:%=$(DIR)/%))
> >
> > Building both 32-bit and 64-bit versions of this is a bit yucky, but I
> > guess it's not worth the Makefile infrastructure (introducing things
> > for building "native" objects) to avoid it.
>
> Yep, that was my thought. We do have "NATIVEONLY" in the top-level
> Makefile, which I guess we could introduce in the tests/Makefile, but I
> think this is simpler for now.
NATIVEONLY doesn't do the same thing though - it builds *everything*
for only one arch.
> > > +$(HELPERS:%=obj32/%): %: %.o obj32/testutils.o
> > > + @$(VECHO) LD32 "(helper)" $@
> > > + $(CC32) $(LDFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS32) -o $@ $^ $(LDLIBS) -lhugetlbfs
> > > +
> > > +$(HELPERS:%=obj64/%): %: %.o obj64/testutils.o
> > > + @$(VECHO) LD64 "(helper)" $@
> > > + $(CC64) $(LDFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS64) -o $@ $^ $(LDLIBS) -lhugetlbfs
> > > +
> >
> > These don't actually need testutils.o
>
> Yep, fixed.
>
> <snip>
>
> > > + if (hugetlbfs_test_path(dir) == 1) {
> > > + printf("%s\n", dir);
> > > + return 0;
> > > + }
> >
> > This test is redundant, hugetlbfs_find_path() already checks that the
> > path is hugetlbfs.
>
> Yep, fixed.
>
> Update patch below. I'll commit it if it looks ok to you.
>
> It was noted recently that checking for a hugetlbfs mountpoint in the
> run_tests.sh can lead to a few issues (spaces in /proc/mounts, for
> instance), which are hard to work around. Instead, make use of the
> library's utilities via a small helper program which should provide
> greater safety.
Looks ok to me.
> Signed-off-by: Nishanth Aravamudan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: David Gibson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
David Gibson | I'll have my music baroque, and my code
david AT gibson.dropbear.id.au | minimalist, thank you. NOT _the_ _other_
| _way_ _around_!
http://www.ozlabs.org/~dgibson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Libhugetlbfs-devel mailing list
Libhugetlbfs-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libhugetlbfs-devel
