[v2,0/4] selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the FP selftests

Message

Mark Brown April 19, 2022, 8:04 p.m. UTC

Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
Makefiles want to work.

v2:
 - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.

Mark Brown (4):
  selftests/arm64: Use TEST_GEN_PROGS_EXTENDED in the FP Makefile
  selftests/arm64: Define top_srcdir for the fp tests
  selftests/arm64: Clean the fp helper libraries
  selftests/arm64: Fix O= builds for the floating point tests

 tools/testing/selftests/arm64/fp/Makefile | 29 +++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)


base-commit: b2d229d4ddb17db541098b83524d901257e93845

Comments

Catalin Marinas April 27, 2022, 5:34 p.m. UTC | #1

Hi Mark,

On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 09:04:38PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
> series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
> Makefiles want to work.
> 
> v2:
>  - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.

Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Thanks.

Catalin Marinas April 27, 2022, 5:37 p.m. UTC | #2

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:48PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> Hi Mark,
> 
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 09:04:38PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > Currently the arm64 selftests don't support building with O=, this
> > series fixes that, bringing them more into line with how the kselftest
> > Makefiles want to work.
> > 
> > v2:
> >  - Rebase onto v5.18-rc3.
> 
> Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Unless you aimed these at 5.18 but I don't think they are urgent.

Mark Brown April 27, 2022, 5:50 p.m. UTC | #3

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:43PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:

> Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).

Sure.  BTW note that the kselftest branch doesn't build since it doesn't
include the SME branch so the test programs for the SME ABI haven't got
a bunch of defintions that they're relying on.

Catalin Marinas April 27, 2022, 6:38 p.m. UTC | #4

On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:50:30PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2022 at 06:34:43PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > Would you mind rebasing them on top of the arm64 for-next/kselftest
> > branch? I get some conflicts with the SME patches that went in there (or
> > I can sort the conflicts out sometime tomorrow/Friday).
> 
> Sure.  BTW note that the kselftest branch doesn't build since it doesn't
> include the SME branch so the test programs for the SME ABI haven't got
> a bunch of defintions that they're relying on.

Ah, I haven't tried it independently. I'll probably merge the sme branch
into it.