From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 7981 invoked by alias); 25 Oct 2013 17:34:22 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 7967 invoked by uid 89); 25 Oct 2013 17:34:22 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:34:21 +0000 Received: from int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r9PHYH1h018887 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 25 Oct 2013 13:34:18 -0400 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.11]) by int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id r9PHYGKX031011; Fri, 25 Oct 2013 13:34:16 -0400 Message-ID: <526AAB97.3060705@redhat.com> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 17:34:00 -0000 From: Pedro Alves User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130625 Thunderbird/17.0.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Doug Evans CC: Yao Qi , gdb-patches Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] New make target 'check-perf' and new dir gdb.perf References: <1381907353-30013-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1381907353-30013-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2013-10/txt/msg00814.txt.bz2 On 10/25/2013 04:04 AM, Doug Evans wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 12:09 AM, Yao Qi wrote: >> We add a new dir gdb.perf in testsuite for all performance tests. >> However, current 'make check' logic will either run dejagnu in >> directory testsuite or iterate all gdb.* directories which has *.exp >> files. Both of them will run tests in gdb.perf. We want to achieve: >> >> 1) typical 'make check' should not run performance tests. In each perf >> test case, GDB_PERFORMANCE is checked. If it doesn't exist, return. >> 2) run perf tests easily. We add a new makefile target 'check-perf'. >> >> V2 is simpler than V1, since we don't have to filter out gdb.perf >> directory. >> >> V3: Move GDB_PERFORMANCE=both appears before RUNTESTFLAGS. It was >> approved by Doug. >> >> gdb: >> >> 2013-10-16 Yao Qi >> >> * Makefile.in (check-perf): New target. >> >> gdb/testsuite: >> >> 2013-10-16 Yao Qi >> >> * Makefile.in (check-perf): New target. >> * configure.ac (AC_OUTPUT): Output Makefile in gdb.perf. >> * configure: Re-generated. >> * gdb.perf/Makefile.in: New. > > No more comments to add here, other than while I think I suggested > "GDB_PERFORMANCE=both" every time I read it I keep thinking there has > to be a better word to use here than "both". :-) > "compile-and-run" is too long. > I'm not suggesting changing anything, just wondering if anyone else > has a better word. "all" as in "do all steps" comes to mind. If we ever add more steps, then the meaning of "all" won't change. OTOH, "both" would get outdated and ambiguous then. But I think my preference would be to hide GDB_PERFORMANCE as an internal implementation detail, and instead have extra make targets: $ make check-perf-compile // just compile $ make check-perf-run // just run $ make check-perf // do all steps Fewer letters to type, even. Sorry if that was suggested before and I missed it. (I'd rename GDB_PERFORMANCE to GDB_PERFTEST_MODE, and GDB_PERFORMANCE_TIMEOUT->GDB_PERFTEST_TIMEOUT while at it.) -- Pedro Alves