On 25.07.2024 21:01, victorm.l...@amd.com wrote:
> From: Victor Lira <victorm.l...@amd.com>
>
> Requested-by: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com>
> Signed-off-by: Victor Lira <victorm.l...@amd.com>
Looks okay to me now, just that I don't see ...
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/automation/eclair_analysis/linker-symbols.sh
> @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
> +#!/bin/sh
> +
> +# Stop immediately if any executed command has exit status different from 0.
> +set -e
> +
> +# Extract linker symbol names (except those starting with ".") from
> assignments.
> +
> +script_name=$(basename "$0")
> +script_dir="$(
> + cd "$(dirname "$0")"
> + echo "${PWD}"
> +)"
> +src_dir="${script_dir}/../.."
> +
> +fatal() {
> + echo "${script_name}: $*" >&2
> + exit 1
> +}
> +
> +usage() {
> + fatal "Usage: ${script_name} <arm|x86>"
> +}
> +
> +if [ $# -ne 1 ]; then
> + usage
> +fi
> +
> +filepath="${src_dir}/xen/arch/${1}/xen.lds"
> +
> +if [ ! -f "$filepath" ]; then
> + fatal "Could not find ${1} linker script. Must be run after arm/x86 build."
... why you have "arm/x86" there when the message already includes ${1}.
That'll simply go stale (and unnoticed) when PPC and/or RISC-V make further
progress. Actually in usage() I'm similarly uncertain you want to mention
the two architectures explicitly. Just say <arch> there? Happy to make
adjustments while committing, so long as you agree.
Jan
