On 09.03.2023 17:58, Roger Pau Monne wrote: > Introduce an install target, like it's used by other tests. This > allows running the test on the installed systems, which is easier than > running it during the build phase when dealing with automated testing. > Strictly speaking the vpci test doesn't require to be run on a Xen > host currently, but that allows easier integration with logic that > runs the rest of the tests.
I accept that as a possible way of looking at things, but personally I remain unconvinced of this model. To me what is installed should be of value to users. If there was a properly separated directory where all (and only) tests were put, I might agree with installing. (Nevertheless this isn't an objection, merely a remark.) > While there also adjust the makefile to use $(RM), and rename the > resulting binary to use a dash instead of an underscore (again to > match the rest of the tests). > > Since the resulting test binary is now part of the distribution CC > must be used instead of HOSTCC. This breaks the run: goal, doesn't it? If the new mode is wanted, I think the two kinds of binaries (and rules) need separating (maybe a way can be found to avoid duplicating the rules, which would seem desirable). > --- a/tools/tests/vpci/Makefile > +++ b/tools/tests/vpci/Makefile > @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ > XEN_ROOT=$(CURDIR)/../../.. > include $(XEN_ROOT)/tools/Rules.mk > > -TARGET := test_vpci > +TARGET := test-vpci > > .PHONY: all > all: $(TARGET) > @@ -11,17 +11,23 @@ run: $(TARGET) > ./$(TARGET) > > $(TARGET): vpci.c vpci.h list.h main.c emul.h > - $(HOSTCC) -g -o $@ vpci.c main.c > + $(CC) -o $@ vpci.c main.c You're losing -g and you're also not covering for it by adding $(CFLAGS) (there should have been use of $(HOSTCFLAGS) already before, I suppose). Jan
