Reply-To: shuah@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] selfttests: timers ksft_ stubs handling changes
To: John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@codeaurora.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
References: <cover.1502404902.git.shuahkh@osg.samsung.com>
 <CALAqxLWJfBZ3oEowHiAvcfy1fNqOnm80mrUv3HnyTxPbmL8Z7Q@mail.gmail.com>
From: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Message-ID: <bc7ff151-42e0-ca94-1d85-69df798dce57@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2017 18:51:11 -0600
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CALAqxLWJfBZ3oEowHiAvcfy1fNqOnm80mrUv3HnyTxPbmL8Z7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1779
Lines: 44

On 08/10/2017 06:10 PM, John Stultz wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 4:53 PM, Shuah Khan <shuahkh@osg.samsung.com> wrote:
>> This patch series consists of changes to:
>>
>> Move ksft_ stubs from individual tests into kselftest_stubs.h and change
>> tests to include it.
>>
>> Fix posix_timers and freq-step tests to run without ksft_ framework.
>>
>> This is in preparation to convert timers tests to ksft TAP 13 format.
>>
>> Question for John Stultz:
>>
>> The conversion work will be easier without the requirement to be able to
>> build and run these tests without ksft_ framework. So far the stubs are
>> simpler. It is might be necessary to ifdef some code paths to have sane
>> output for both KTEST and !KTEST cases.
>>
>> Would it be easier to pull in kselftest.h into timers external repo
>> (if one still exists). This is based on the observation that newer
>> timer tests don't support !KTEST case e.g: posix_timers and freq-step.
>>
>> Please review and let me know how you would like me to proceed with the
>> conversion. I am looking for answer to how important is it to continue to
>> support !KTEST case.
> 
> Yea. I'm thinking at this point I'm fine with dropping the attempt to
> keep kselftest and my external timekeeping tests in sync.

Would you like me to clean !KTEST support or leave it the way it is.
It sounds like, I will drop these patches anyway.

> 
> Though something that might be nice however is having some place that
> keeps tarball releases of kselftest around? As it would make pulling
> tests onto a target machine a bit easier. Does that already exist?
> 

There is an install script tools/testing/selftests/gen_kselftest_tar.sh
for generating tar-ball for compiled tests at the moment. There is none
for source package.

thanks,
-- Shuah