Hi Andrew,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>
> Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.17 v5 00/17] Toolstack build system
> improvement, toward non-recursive makefiles
> 
> On 13/10/2022 14:04, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > Patch series available in this git branch:
> > https://xenbits.xen.org/git-http/people/aperard/xen-unstable.git
> br.toolstack-build-system-v5
> 
> I've done a full rebuild of this (with the 2 noted fixes) with Xapi, and
> it does resolve the Ocaml library linking issues.  Thanks.
> 
> So T-by.  If an allowance for 4.17 appears, I can see about getting some
> of the more obviously-trivial areas reviewed and committed.

Release-acked-by: Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@arm.com>

Since this series is quite large and just out of curiosity, do we have a
pipeline or CI jobs to test all the modules that affected by the makefile
touched by this series? Would be good to have some test results to
boost our confidence of committing the series.

Kind regards,
Henry

> 
> ~Andrew

On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 06:26:09AM +0000, Henry Wang wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>
> > Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.17 v5 00/17] Toolstack build system
> > improvement, toward non-recursive makefiles
> > 
> > On 13/10/2022 14:04, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > > Patch series available in this git branch:
> > > https://xenbits.xen.org/git-http/people/aperard/xen-unstable.git
> > br.toolstack-build-system-v5
> > 
> > I've done a full rebuild of this (with the 2 noted fixes) with Xapi, and
> > it does resolve the Ocaml library linking issues.  Thanks.
> > 
> > So T-by.  If an allowance for 4.17 appears, I can see about getting some
> > of the more obviously-trivial areas reviewed and committed.
> 
> Release-acked-by: Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@arm.com>

Thanks.

> Since this series is quite large and just out of curiosity, do we have a
> pipeline or CI jobs to test all the modules that affected by the makefile
> touched by this series? Would be good to have some test results to
> boost our confidence of committing the series.

I did push my branch to Gitlab, and that the pipeline:
    https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/anthonyper/xen/-/pipelines/665987083
    (private to xen-project members)
Only failures are I think the same one as on staging, test failure on
arm, but no build issues.

I'm not sure that everything is tested, but most of it is.

Cheers,

-- 
Anthony PERARD

On 14/10/2022 11:14, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 06:26:09AM +0000, Henry Wang wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.17 v5 00/17] Toolstack build system
>>> improvement, toward non-recursive makefiles
>>>
>>> On 13/10/2022 14:04, Anthony PERARD wrote:
>>>> Patch series available in this git branch:
>>>> https://xenbits.xen.org/git-http/people/aperard/xen-unstable.git
>>> br.toolstack-build-system-v5
>>>
>>> I've done a full rebuild of this (with the 2 noted fixes) with Xapi, and
>>> it does resolve the Ocaml library linking issues.  Thanks.
>>>
>>> So T-by.  If an allowance for 4.17 appears, I can see about getting some
>>> of the more obviously-trivial areas reviewed and committed.
>> Release-acked-by: Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@arm.com>
> Thanks.
>
>> Since this series is quite large and just out of curiosity, do we have a
>> pipeline or CI jobs to test all the modules that affected by the makefile
>> touched by this series? Would be good to have some test results to
>> boost our confidence of committing the series.
> I did push my branch to Gitlab, and that the pipeline:
>     https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/anthonyper/xen/-/pipelines/665987083
>     (private to xen-project members)
> Only failures are I think the same one as on staging, test failure on
> arm, but no build issues.
>
> I'm not sure that everything is tested, but most of it is.

The XenServer specfile lists all build artefacts specifically, because
we've had too many bugs where things have silently disappeared.

My testing confirms that nothing has appeared or disappeared as a result
of these changes, and the functional looks pretty good.  (except for the
latest shadow assertion found, which was a regression in XSA-410.  Fix
is in review elsewhere.)

~Andrew

Hi Andrew,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>
> Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.17 v5 00/17] Toolstack build system
> improvement, toward non-recursive makefiles
> The XenServer specfile lists all build artefacts specifically, because
> we've had too many bugs where things have silently disappeared.
> 
> My testing confirms that nothing has appeared or disappeared as a result
> of these changes, and the functional looks pretty good.  (except for the
> latest shadow assertion found, which was a regression in XSA-410.  Fix
> is in review elsewhere.)

This is good to know. Thanks for the confirmation. No problem from
my side then.

Kind regards,
Henry

> 
> ~Andrew

Hi Anthony,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@citrix.com>
> Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.17 v5 00/17] Toolstack build system
> improvement, toward non-recursive makefiles
> 
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2022 at 06:26:09AM +0000, Henry Wang wrote:
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andrew Cooper <Andrew.Cooper3@citrix.com>
> > > Subject: Re: [XEN PATCH for-4.17 v5 00/17] Toolstack build system
> > > improvement, toward non-recursive makefiles
> > >
> > > On 13/10/2022 14:04, Anthony PERARD wrote:
> > > > Patch series available in this git branch:
> > > > https://xenbits.xen.org/git-http/people/aperard/xen-unstable.git
> > > br.toolstack-build-system-v5
> > >
> > > I've done a full rebuild of this (with the 2 noted fixes) with Xapi, and
> > > it does resolve the Ocaml library linking issues.� Thanks.
> > >
> > > So T-by.� If an allowance for 4.17 appears, I can see about getting some
> > > of the more obviously-trivial areas reviewed and committed.
> >
> > Release-acked-by: Henry Wang <Henry.Wang@arm.com>
> 
> Thanks.

No problem, my pleasure.

> 
> > Since this series is quite large and just out of curiosity, do we have a
> > pipeline or CI jobs to test all the modules that affected by the makefile
> > touched by this series? Would be good to have some test results to
> > boost our confidence of committing the series.
> 
> I did push my branch to Gitlab, and that the pipeline:
>     https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/anthonyper/xen/-
> /pipelines/665987083
>     (private to xen-project members)
> Only failures are I think the same one as on staging, test failure on
> arm, but no build issues.

Sorry for the arm failure, I will try to respin the patch ASAP and hopefully
the CI will be unblocked soon.

Kind regards,
Henry

> 
> I'm not sure that everything is tested, but most of it is.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> --
> Anthony PERARD