From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 122789 invoked by alias); 15 Mar 2018 14:52:08 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 122750 invoked by uid 89); 15 Mar 2018 14:52:07 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: homiemail-a56.g.dreamhost.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use correct includes in benchtests To: Zack Weinberg , Wilco Dijkstra Cc: "libc-alpha@sourceware.org" , nd References: From: Siddhesh Poyarekar Message-ID: Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 14:52:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-03/txt/msg00373.txt.bz2 On Thursday 15 March 2018 08:12 PM, Zack Weinberg wrote: > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Wilco Dijkstra wrote: >> Currently the benchtests are run with internal GLIBC headers, which is incorrect. >> Defining _ISOMAC in the makefile ensures the internal headers are bypassed. >> Fix all tests which were relying on internal defines or includes. > ... >> -CPPFLAGS-nonlib += -DDURATION=$(BENCH_DURATION) >> +CPPFLAGS-nonlib += -DDURATION=$(BENCH_DURATION) -D_ISOMAC > > Is there a reason you can't change `lib := nonlib` to `lib := > testsuite` in the invocation of libof-iterator.mk, instead? Several > other places in the Makefile would need to be changed, but using the > testsuite module is abstractly more appropriate and might have other > desirable effects in the future (e.g. not including libc-symbols.h at > all). It's been a while since I touched those bits but IIRC nonlib is treated specially, which is why I had made it nonlib. If it's not, then calling it benchtests is a good idea (and then have testsuite for all the test programs, although I believe some test programs test internals; they need to be split out too eventually), but orthogonal to this change. Siddhesh