From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from dpdk.org (dpdk.org [92.243.14.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 588EDA10DA for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 22:59:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [92.243.14.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59C9E1C2DE; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 22:59:29 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94AB41C2A6 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 22:59:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx06.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E43A5307D930; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 20:59:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dhcp-25.97.bos.redhat.com (unknown [10.18.25.67]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F01F5C219; Fri, 2 Aug 2019 20:59:26 +0000 (UTC) From: Aaron Conole To: Thomas Monjalon Cc: dev@dpdk.org, Michael Santana Francisco , David Marchand , Bruce Richardson , Ferruh Yigit , Luca Boccassi References: <20190731145030.19956-1-aconole@redhat.com> <20190731145030.19956-3-aconole@redhat.com> <2139994.LeHafPJYVc@xps> Date: Fri, 02 Aug 2019 16:59:26 -0400 In-Reply-To: <2139994.LeHafPJYVc@xps> (Thomas Monjalon's message of "Fri, 02 Aug 2019 22:27:31 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.16 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.48]); Fri, 02 Aug 2019 20:59:27 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH 2/2] ci: enable unit tests under travis-ci 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: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" Thomas Monjalon writes: > 31/07/2019 22:54, Michael Santana Francisco: >> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 10:50 AM Aaron Conole wrote: >> > --- a/.ci/linux-build.sh >> > +++ b/.ci/linux-build.sh >> > @@ -22,3 +22,11 @@ fi >> > OPTS="$OPTS --default-library=$DEF_LIB" >> > meson build --werror -Dexamples=all $OPTS >> > ninja -C build >> > + >> > +if [ "$RUN_TESTS" = "1" ]; then >> > + # On the test build, also build the documentation, since it's expensive >> > + # and we shouldn't need to build so much of it. >> > + ninja -C build doc > > I am not sure to understand the comment. > Do you mean you build the documentation only once, > which is when running tests? Yes. > Why it is not a new option similar as RUN_TESTS? I mentioned it at: http://mails.dpdk.org/archives/dev/2019-July/136635.html also. Because it adds build time. >> > --- a/.travis.yml >> > +++ b/.travis.yml >> > @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ env: >> > - DEF_LIB="shared" >> > - DEF_LIB="static" OPTS="-Denable_kmods=false" >> > - DEF_LIB="shared" OPTS="-Denable_kmods=false" >> > + - DEF_LIB="shared" RUN_TESTS=1 >> I don't agree with this. This is redundant. Why not put RUN_TESTS=1 on >> an already exiting builds instead of adding two new builds like you >> are doing here? > > I agree it is a strange logic. > Why not use an existing build to run the tests? The biggest reason is when it fails, it is difficult to know why "at a glance." When it does fail due to unit tests, it sometimes takes a long time to load the logs - so just knowing that the failure is likely in the unit tests area vs. build is helpful to understand where to start looking. It isn't a big deal to merge them, though if you'd prefer it.