muvarov replied on github web page:

example/traffic_mgmt/Makefile.am
line 6
@@ -1,9 +1,5 @@
 include $(top_srcdir)/example/Makefile.inc
 
-bin_PROGRAMS = odp_traffic_mgmt$(EXEEXT)
-odp_traffic_mgmt_LDFLAGS = $(AM_LDFLAGS) -static
-odp_traffic_mgmt_CFLAGS = $(AM_CFLAGS) -I${top_srcdir}/example
+bin_PROGRAMS = odp_traffic_mgmt


Comment:
@lumag now I a little bit lost. Lets sync up on monday about that.

> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
> 
> @muvarov The mentioned commit is plain wrong, starting from the 
> `AC_SUBST([EXEEXT])`, which is not necessary. All `_PROGRAMS` variables will 
> be automatically extended with `$(EXEEXT)` during `Makefile.am` -> 
> `Makefile.in` conversion by Automake, it is stated in the documentation. In 
> our case this suffix is only necessary if `dirA` uses (in `TESTS` variable) 
> program built in `dirB`. For example, like `test/linux-generic/Makefile.am` 
> does for `validation/api/shmem/shmem_linux` or `ring/ring_main`. Oh, wait. 
> Where is the `$(EXEEXT)` suffix in the former case?


>> muvarov wrote
>> point is to name programs with extension like test.exe and run this under 
>> make check. Commit 0274087a added that.


>>> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
>>> What for? `_PROGRAMS` will automatically receive `$(EXEEXT)` if necessary, 
>>> so do `$(TESTS)`. What purpose do these `$(EXEEXT)` surve at this point?


>>>> muvarov wrote
>>>> Looks like some misunderstanding here. I wrote that we should keep 
>>>> ${EXEEXT}


>>>>> muvarov wrote
>>>>> @lumag  I still do not understand do you remove extensions? That link 
>>>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/automake/manual/html_node/EXEEXT.html says 
>>>>> that there is no way to do it anyhow different. I think removing will 
>>>>> break existence functionality. 


>>>>>> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
>>>>>> It is used as is by linux-dpdk. Other platforms may also benefit from 
>>>>>> atomic-related checks, in which case this test should just be 
>>>>>> generatlized.


>>>>>>> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
>>>>>>> I will drop remaining EXEEXT from examples, where necessary. Looks like 
>>>>>>> I skipped some. Stripping EXEEXT from test (and platform/l-g/test) will 
>>>>>>> come in a separate patch.


>>>>>>>> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
>>>>>>>> It will fail with this PR. I should fix that.


>>>>>>>>> muvarov wrote
>>>>>>>>> make check will build it. Optional  change.


>>>>>>>>>> muvarov wrote
>>>>>>>>>> this patch needs to be revising. EXEEXT somewhere is remove 
>>>>>>>>>> somewhere exist. EXEEXT was added by Kalrey to run make check on 
>>>>>>>>>> their platform where they can not run binaries without EXEEXT. I 
>>>>>>>>>> think we should leave extensions in the code.


>>>>>>>>>>> muvarov wrote
>>>>>>>>>>> to compile tests you need odp library compiled. To execute 
>>>>>>>>>>> performance tests examples are needed to be compile. "." defines 
>>>>>>>>>>> order for parallel make. Moving test_common to the top should bake 
>>>>>>>>>>> parallel make.


>>>>>>>>>>>> muvarov wrote
>>>>>>>>>>>> this atomic things are specific to linux-generic. Are you panning 
>>>>>>>>>>>> to use they anywhere else?


>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> @Bill-Fischofer-Linaro updated


>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just for the sake of 80 chars limit? Fine, I will update this.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What's wrong with factoring this like:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ```
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> VALIDATION_TESTDIR=platform/$ODP_PLATFORM/test/validation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> PLATFORM_VALIDATION=${TEST_SRC_DIR}/../../$VALIDATION_TESTDIR
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ```
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That seems to solve the line length problem cleanly.


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov(lumag) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not in a clean way


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Bill Fischofer(Bill-Fischofer-Linaro) wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Checkpatch flags this line as being > 80 chars. Can it not be 
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> split into two lines or otherwise shortened?


https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/213#discussion_r144642241
updated_at 2017-10-13 19:45:51

Reply via email to