From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 668831B117 for ; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:40:40 +0100 (CET) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE8E22C8E; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 06:40:39 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 29 Jan 2019 06:40:39 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=monjalon.net; h= from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; s=mesmtp; bh=ScoWIugfRXkKBpUOoVmBbCTs2D1zQxbji/PwDy6atoQ=; b=csqqOWCIxw8B 3LAdIWA6gwrNiLCPeSZ3mpyaz4vd3CBAa6mcNYiOeBFWXFFzSQVCy3d1KAypJHCZ CZL31S0SZQ2F/it3LEsIgFOs9smm6lDGtiVEdqgB94++g5VB5mDPrGaahO1JsyA6 rrGrzzK2HsqbhweJeGT9vbK9xYcC7eY= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=ScoWIugfRXkKBpUOoVmBbCTs2D1zQxbji/PwDy6at oQ=; b=YbdLArSN97VvJ3QnM2B6dtu4OoM8IjwIXfzT4OFxyMWQ39x4UhCOH6dJH Ct7whGfUK52DDALr4Cpb6/TcdUhlBDGRm1sUOd54kltU9XdmzjtXSdlkP3Atqujz ylXDMSg48r5/78w3DTY2ZI+xBvz8+j3luIvvWL3tSZS6X02Kxmaf6MAdVXnkFYqW 4qvlV4qDhoJNi9yHqgc5bf+6sa67CZM254iCEzOMCH8X7ohRcYhsYC+GyDAqViCW bThOPKbHub71mbghF8lYVMtR4l7B+y06heEcOybOvQ4MJitOmOCR4F8Z2xW3wJEp THIG3kUi7PAccRaH+0K5fIxRR59oQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedtledrjedvgdefvdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfhuthenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedt tdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvufffkfgjfh gggfgtsehtufertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefvhhhomhgrshcuofhonhhjrghlohhnuceo thhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhhonhdrnhgvtheqnecukfhppeejjedrudefgedrvddtfe drudekgeenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepthhhohhmrghssehmohhnjhgrlhho nhdrnhgvthenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedt X-ME-Proxy: Received: from xps.localnet (184.203.134.77.rev.sfr.net [77.134.203.184]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id E07D6E4559; Tue, 29 Jan 2019 06:40:38 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Monjalon To: Bruce Richardson Cc: dev@dpdk.org Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 12:40:37 +0100 Message-ID: <2309208.nfQRyMXgnH@xps> In-Reply-To: <20190125203019.GA57044@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <20190125202642.66559-1-bruce.richardson@intel.com> <20190125203019.GA57044@bricha3-MOBL.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 0/4] RFC: consolidate testing apps to app dir X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK patches and discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 11:40:40 -0000 25/01/2019 21:30, Bruce Richardson: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2019 at 08:26:38PM +0000, Bruce Richardson wrote: > > The apps for testing are split between the "test" and "app" directories, > > with a not-very-clear distinction between the two (at least to my mind). > > > > Given how the apps are being built, the easiest path to having > > cmdline_test, test-acl and test-pipeline build using meson is to > > consolidate all these apps back into the app folder and use the logic > > there. The bpf folder doesn't contain an actual application, but > > rather example bpf code which can be loaded into testpmd. That is > > possibly best moved to the examples folder, but I'm open to feedback > > on the best place for it. > > > > With these changes, the "test" folder then becomes the location for > > unit tests only. > > > > > > Bruce Richardson (4): > > test/cmdline_test: move to app directory > > test/test-acl: move to app directory > > test/test-pipeline: move to app directory > > test/bpf: move to examples folder > > > > Although these patches are for 19.05, I'm sending them now for some early > review, as I think we need a deprecation notice for this change in 19.02 if > these changes are acceptable to people. We don't need a deprecation notice, as it is an internal change without any impact for the users. > Therefore, please review and let me know any issues people see with this > change. We should move all test apps into the same directory. Is there any benefit of keeping unit tests separate? It looks more logic to move everything in test/ but it would make the git history of testpmd more complex. The other choice is to move all tests in app/. The other split to discuss is between app/ and usertools/. We could move user-oriented apps to usertools. pdump and proc-info fall into this basket because they can be used for debugging purpose.