Stefano Garzarella
2023-Sep-27 07:37 UTC
[PATCH net-next v1 12/12] test/vsock: io_uring rx/tx tests
On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:00:19PM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote:> > >On 26.09.2023 16:04, Stefano Garzarella wrote: >> On Fri, Sep 22, 2023 at 08:24:28AM +0300, Arseniy Krasnov wrote: >>> This adds set of tests which use io_uring for rx/tx. This test suite is >>> implemented as separated util like 'vsock_test' and has the same set of >>> input arguments as 'vsock_test'. These tests only cover cases of data >>> transmission (no connect/bind/accept etc). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Arseniy Krasnov <avkrasnov at salutedevices.com> >>> --- >>> Changelog: >>> v5(big patchset) -> v1: >>> ?* Use LDLIBS instead of LDFLAGS. >>> >>> tools/testing/vsock/Makefile?????????? |?? 7 +- >>> tools/testing/vsock/vsock_uring_test.c | 321 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 327 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> create mode 100644 tools/testing/vsock/vsock_uring_test.c >>> >>> diff --git a/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile b/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile >>> index 1a26f60a596c..c84380bfc18d 100644 >>> --- a/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile >>> +++ b/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile >>> @@ -1,12 +1,17 @@ >>> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only >>> +ifeq ($(MAKECMDGOALS),vsock_uring_test) >>> +LDLIBS = -luring >>> +endif >>> + >> >> This will fails if for example we call make with more targets, >> e.g. `make vsock_test vsock_uring_test`. >> >> I'd suggest to use something like this: >> >> --- a/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile >> +++ b/tools/testing/vsock/Makefile >> @@ -1,13 +1,11 @@ >> ?# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only >> -ifeq ($(MAKECMDGOALS),vsock_uring_test) >> -LDLIBS = -luring >> -endif >> - >> ?all: test vsock_perf >> ?test: vsock_test vsock_diag_test >> ?vsock_test: vsock_test.o vsock_test_zerocopy.o timeout.o control.o util.o >> ?vsock_diag_test: vsock_diag_test.o timeout.o control.o util.o >> ?vsock_perf: vsock_perf.o >> + >> +vsock_uring_test: LDLIBS = -luring >> ?vsock_uring_test: control.o util.o vsock_uring_test.o timeout.o >> >> ?CFLAGS += -g -O2 -Werror -Wall -I. -I../../include -I../../../usr/include -Wno-pointer-sign -fno-strict-overflow -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -MMD -U_FORTIFY_SOURCE -D_GNU_SOURCE >> >>> all: test vsock_perf >>> test: vsock_test vsock_diag_test >>> vsock_test: vsock_test.o vsock_test_zerocopy.o timeout.o control.o util.o >>> vsock_diag_test: vsock_diag_test.o timeout.o control.o util.o >>> vsock_perf: vsock_perf.o >>> +vsock_uring_test: control.o util.o vsock_uring_test.o timeout.o >> >> Shoud we add this new test to the "test" target as well? > >Ok, but in this case, this target will always depend on liburing.I think it's fine. If they want to run all the tests, they need liburing. If they don't want to build io_uring tests, they can just do `make vsock_test`. Stefano