[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZW4sRL0vPofcoS43@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2023 16:45:08 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
James Clark <james.clark@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-perf-users <linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] perf build: Shellcheck support for OUTPUT
directory
Em Fri, Dec 01, 2023 at 11:49:59AM +0530, Athira Rajeev escreveu:
>
>
> > On 30-Nov-2023, at 3:04 AM, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > Migrate Makefile.tests to Build so that variables like rule_mkdir are
> > defined via Makefile.build (needed so the output directory can be
> > created). This requires SHELLCHECK being exported and the clean rule
> > tweaking to remove the files in find.
> >
> > Change find "-perm -o=x" as it was failing on my Debian based Linux
> > kernel tree, switch to using "-executable".
> >
> > Adding a filename prefix of "." to the shellcheck log files is a pain
> > and error prone in make, remove this prefix and just add the
> > shellcheck log files to .gitignore.
> >
> > Fix the command echo so that running the test is displayed.
> >
> > Fixes: 1638b11ef815 ("perf tools: Add perf binary dependent rule for shellcheck log in Makefile.perf")
> > Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
>
> Hi Ian,
>
> Changes looks good to me.
> Tested with make, make clean, make with shellcheck error, make with NO_SHELLCHECK
>
> Reviewed-by: Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Next time please reply with your Reviewed-by to the cover letter, so
that b4 stamps your reviewed-by to all the patches and not just to the
patch that you replied to.
This time I'll take the plural in "Changes look good to me" to signify
that you reviewed the whole series, ok?
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists