qemu-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC v4 5/7] tests: New make target check-source


From: Markus Armbruster
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [RFC v4 5/7] tests: New make target check-source
Date: Fri, 24 May 2019 14:36:58 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)

Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden> writes:

> On 5/23/19 10:15 AM, Markus Armbruster wrote:
>> Make target check-source is for checking the source code itself.  For
>> now, there's just one such check, make target check-headers.  It
>> checks basic header sanity: for each header "FOO.h", test whether
>> 
>>      #include "qemu/osdep.h"
>>      #include "FOO.h"
>>      #include "FOO.h"
>> 
>> compiles.
>> 
>> The test works only in a git tree, with git installed.  It is skipped
>> unless $(SRC_PATH)/.git exists.
>> 
>> Third-party headers we don't intend to clean up are excluded from this
>> test.  So are a few "funny" headers.  See make variable
>> excluded-headers.
>> 
>> A large number of headers don't pass this test, by design or by
>> accident.  To keep things more manageable, exclude all headers outside
>> include/ for now.
>> 
>> Headers known to fail the test are marked with
>> 
>>     /* FIXME Does not pass make check-headers, yet! */
>> 
>> Headers known to work only in certain configurations are marked like
>> 
>>     /* FIXME Does not pass make check-headers without CONFIG_WIN32, yet! */
>> 
>> I tried to find and mark all of them by testing various
>> configurations.  Still, "make check" might fail for configurations I
>> didn't test.
>> 
>> Known issue: some of these don't actually need fixing; they're *meant*
>> to work only in certain configurations.  We'll want to invent a
>> suitable marker that doesn't claim FIXME.
>> 
>> Some headers may only be included into target-dependent code: they use
>> identifiers poisoned by exec/poison.h, or include cpu.h.  These
>> headers are marked with a comment
>> 
>>     /* NOTE: May only be included into target-dependent code */
>> 
>> The test treats them specially.
>> 
>> Known issue: some of these are intended for specific targets.  The
>> test should skip them for other targets, but doesn't.  They're marked
>> FIXME instead, which is wrong.
>> 
>> New make target check-bad-headers runs the test for headers expected
>> to fail it.  This helps with examining the failures.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Markus Armbruster <address@hidden>
>> ---
> [...]>
>> diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
>> index 59de8e2494..42f02c5ceb 100644
>> --- a/Makefile
>> +++ b/Makefile
>> @@ -416,6 +416,8 @@ dummy := $(call unnest-vars,, \
>>                  audio-obj-m \
>>                  trace-obj-y)
>>  
>> +RECURSIVE_TARGETS := all clean install
>> +
>>  include $(SRC_PATH)/tests/Makefile.include
>>  
>>  all: $(DOCS) $(if $(BUILD_DOCS),sphinxdocs) $(TOOLS) $(HELPERS-y) 
>> recurse-all modules
>> @@ -436,7 +438,7 @@ config-host.h-timestamp: config-host.mak
>>  qemu-options.def: $(SRC_PATH)/qemu-options.hx $(SRC_PATH)/scripts/hxtool
>>      $(call quiet-command,sh $(SRC_PATH)/scripts/hxtool -h < $< > 
>> $@,"GEN","$@")
>>  
>> -TARGET_DIRS_RULES := $(foreach t, all clean install, $(addsuffix /$(t), 
>> $(TARGET_DIRS)))
>> +TARGET_DIRS_RULES:=$(foreach t, $(RECURSIVE_TARGETS), $(addsuffix /$(t), 
>> $(TARGET_DIRS)))
>>  
>>  SOFTMMU_ALL_RULES=$(filter %-softmmu/all, $(TARGET_DIRS_RULES))
>>  $(SOFTMMU_ALL_RULES): $(authz-obj-y)
>> diff --git a/Makefile.target b/Makefile.target
>> index fdbe7c89f4..a46cfda580 100644
>> --- a/Makefile.target
>> +++ b/Makefile.target
>> @@ -41,6 +41,7 @@ STPFILES=
>>  
>>  # Makefile Tests
>>  include $(SRC_PATH)/tests/tcg/Makefile.include
>> +include $(SRC_PATH)/tests/check-headers.mak
>>  
>>  config-target.h: config-target.h-timestamp
>>  config-target.h-timestamp: config-target.mak
>> @@ -216,6 +217,22 @@ hmp-commands.h: $(SRC_PATH)/hmp-commands.hx 
>> $(SRC_PATH)/scripts/hxtool
>>  hmp-commands-info.h: $(SRC_PATH)/hmp-commands-info.hx 
>> $(SRC_PATH)/scripts/hxtool
>>      $(call quiet-command,sh $(SRC_PATH)/scripts/hxtool -h < $< > 
>> $@,"GEN","$(TARGET_DIR)$@")
>>  
>> +.PHONY: check-headers
>> +ifeq ($(wildcard $(SRC_PATH)/.git),)
>> +check-headers check-bad-headers:
>> +    @echo "  SKIP  $@ (requires a git tree)"
>> +else
>> +check-headers: $(check-target-header-tests:.c=.o)
>> +
>> +# Expected to fail:
>> +check-bad-headers: $(check-bad-target-header-tests:.c=.o)
>> +
>> +.SECONDARY: $(check-target-header-tests)
>> +$(check-target-header-tests) $(check-bad-target-header-tests): 
>> tests/header-test-template.c
>> +    @mkdir -p $(dir $@)
>> +    @sed 's,@header@,$(subst tests/headers/,,$(@:.c=.h)),' <$< >$@
>> +endif
>> +
>>  clean: clean-target
>>      rm -f *.a *~ $(PROGS)
>>      rm -f $(shell find . -name '*.[od]')
>> @@ -238,3 +255,5 @@ endif
>>  
>>  generated-files-y += config-target.h
>>  Makefile: $(generated-files-y)
>> +
>> +-include $(check-target-header-tests:.c=.d) 
>> $(check-bad-target-header-tests:.c=.d)
>
> $ make microblazeel-softmmu/tests/headers/include/exec/user/abitypes.o
> ./include/exec/user/abitypes.h:6:10: fatal error: cpu.h: No such file or
> directory
> make: *** [./rules.mak:69:
> microblazeel-softmmu/tests/headers/include/exec/user/abitypes.o] Error 1
>
> ^ this one looks legit, it's arch-specific, right?

Yes: it includes cpu.h.

> $ make tests/headers/include/hw/net/lance.o
>   CC      tests/headers/include/hw/net/lance.o
> In file included from tests/headers/include/hw/net/lance.c:14:
> ./include/hw/net/lance.h:42:5: error: unknown type name ‘SysBusDevice’
>      SysBusDevice parent_obj;
>      ^~~~~~~~~~~~
> make: *** [./rules.mak:69: tests/headers/include/hw/net/lance.o] Error 1
>
> $ make tests/headers/include/hw/isa/vt82c686.o
>   CC      tests/headers/include/hw/isa/vt82c686.o
> In file included from tests/headers/include/hw/isa/vt82c686.c:14:
> ./include/hw/isa/vt82c686.h:13:27: error: unknown type name ‘qemu_irq’
>                            qemu_irq sci_irq);
>                            ^~~~~~~~
> make: *** [./rules.mak:69: tests/headers/include/hw/isa/vt82c686.o]
>
> Nice, I like it :)
>
> The rule pattern is not obvious (in particular with arch-specific
> targets), but it has probably always been like that.
>
> Tested-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <address@hidden>

Thanks!



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]