Le mer. 17 déc. 2025 à 12:02, Alexander Kanavin via lists.openembedded.org <[email protected]> a écrit : > > On Wed, 17 Dec 2025 at 10:48, Chen Qi via lists.openembedded.org > <[email protected]> wrote: > > When toggling ptest for DISTRO_FEATURES, the do_patch function > > gets rerun. > > > > The dependency chain is: > > do_patch -> do_qa_patch -> DISTRO_FEATURES{ptest} > > > > Such rerun is not necessary. And it's kind of annoying because everything > > gets rebuilt, including cross toolchain and recipes not using ptest. > > > > The ERROR_QA and WARN_QA should be enough to trigger the re-run > > if unimplemented-ptest is added to one of them. > ... > > +do_qa_patch[vardepsexclude] = "DISTRO_FEATURES" > > The offending code is this: > > if not bb.utils.contains('DISTRO_FEATURES', 'ptest', True, False, d): > pass > elif > (gigantic list of elif checks follows) > > I wonder if we should rather drop this first check for DISTRO_FEATURES > instead. These are recipe-level checks, and the issues reported are > valid regardless of whether ptest is in someone's DISTRO_FEATURES or > not.
The idea behind this check was to not make a user who has disabled ptests pay the performance cost of reading/exploring a bunch of file/directories. But the test on ERROR/WARN QA should largely be enough for that goal. I agree with you on dropping the first check for DISTRO_FEATURES. > Using vardepsexclude is problematic because do_qa_patch may have other > uses of DISTRO_FEATURES in the future, and the same reasoning may not > apply to them. > > Alex > > > -- Yoann Congal Smile ECS
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#228110): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/228110 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/116824171/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
