On 2023-09-17 05:22:19+0200, Willy Tarreau wrote:
On Sat, Sep 16, 2023 at 09:13:26AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
Currently the nolibc testsuite embeds the test executable into a kernel image with CONFIG_INITRAMFS_SOURCE. This forces a full kernel relink everytime the test executable is updated.
This relinking step dominates the test cycle. It is slower than building and running the test in qemu together.
With a bit of Makefile-shuffling the relinking can be avoided.
That's pretty nice as indeed it still takes a while to relink it into the kernel. I agree that for running nolibc-test in qemu we don't need a unified image. However I've seldom used it on real hardware and I find it significantly more convenient to use as a single image in this case. Maybe we should just rename targets so that everything qemu-related just uses two distinct images while a "unified-image" (or anything else) still assembles the image into the kernel (BTW the help on the "kernel" target still mentions initramfs).
Sounds good, "unified-image" is a bit close to "unified kernel image" (UKI) which is similar but different.
What about kernel-standalone?
Note that we don't need to modify anything in the build system to create an initrd, I usually make them by hand using "cpio -o -H newc", we don't need anything else here.
I'd like to keep the build self-contained. But actually the kernel build will always build a minimal initramfs if CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD is set. This config is needed for the nolibc testsuite in any case.
The fact that the initrd is always build means that usr/gen_init_cpio is also always build. So we can add "kernel" as a prerequisite to "initramfs.cpio" and everything should work out without any buildsystem modifications.
Regarding rerun, I'd rather keep it for the sole reason that I've used it to check for randomly failing errors (typically the timing-based ones). It's convenient to run the same image 100 times if needed. I'm not strongly attached to it, but if "make run" is slower, then we can keep it. However if you really want to drop it, it also needs to be dropped from the help message ;-)
Fine for me, let's keep it :-)