From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 329DE569A for ; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 14:39:24 +0100 (CET) Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B1FF88EFD7; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 13:39:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sopuli.koti.laiskiainen.org (vpn1-4-137.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.4.137]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id tB3DdLa1010761; Thu, 3 Dec 2015 08:39:21 -0500 To: "Mcnamara, John" , "dev@dpdk.org" References: From: Panu Matilainen Message-ID: <56604608.7040503@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2015 15:39:20 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.68 on 10.5.11.23 Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] scripts: support any legal git revisions as abi validation range X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2015 13:39:24 -0000 On 12/03/2015 02:14 PM, Mcnamara, John wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Panu Matilainen >> Sent: Wednesday, December 2, 2015 4:51 PM >> To: dev@dpdk.org >> Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] scripts: support any legal git revisions as >> abi validation range >> >> In addition to git tags, support validating abi between any legal >> gitrevisions(7) syntaxes, such as "validate-abi.sh . -1 " >> "validate-abi.sh master mybrach " etc in addition to validating >> between tags. Makes it easier to run the validator for in-development >> work. > > Hi Panu, > > +1 for this. > > You might also change the ABI validation section of the docs to go along > with this. Something like the patch below. If not I'll submit it > afterwards. Good points, including changing the usage message to REV instead of TAG. I'll send an improved version based on this, thanks. > > Also, if someone has some bandwidth it would be good to add an option > to pass -j with an optional number to "make" in the script. Can do, although I'm still waiting fo my previous, semi-related validate-abi patches from September to be applied... - Panu -