[LTP] [PATCH v2 2/4] lib: Introduce LTP_KCONFIG_DISABLE environment variables
Petr Vorel
pvorel@suse.cz
Thu Jan 6 18:41:52 CET 2022
Hi all,
> Hi!
> > > > diff --git a/doc/user-guide.txt b/doc/user-guide.txt
> > > > index 494652618..8d4435a28 100644
> > > > --- a/doc/user-guide.txt
> > > > +++ b/doc/user-guide.txt
> > > > @@ -18,6 +18,9 @@ For running LTP network tests see `testcases/network/README.md`.
> > > > | 'LTP_SINGLE_FS_TYPE' | Testing only - specifies filesystem instead all
> > > > supported (for tests with '.all_filesystems').
> > > > | 'LTP_DEV_FS_TYPE' | Filesystem used for testing (default: 'ext2').
> > > > +| 'LTP_KCONFIG_DISABLE' | Switch for kernel config check functionality.
> > > > + 'y' or '1': disable kconfig check,
> > > > + 'n' or '0': enable kconfig check.
> > > Maybe it would be better named LTP_KCONFIG_SKIP or even
> > > KCONFIG_SKIP_CHECK we do have KCONFIG_PATH so it would make sense to
> > > keep the kernel config related variables prefixed with just KCONFIG_
> > > I think that the point made by Tim Bird was that the KCONFIG_PATH should
> > > be standartized variable among testsuites, so it makes sense to have
> > > KCONFIG_SKIP_CHECK as a standartized variable as well.
> > Is it too bad to have LTP_KCONFIG_SKIP_CHECK and LTP_KCONFIG_PATH ?
> > Maybe we could change it even now.
> Yes, the whole reason not to prefix it with LTP_ is to have a standard
> among all the testsuites. The more variables are standartized the
> better.
Ah, thanks, I wasn't aware of this agreement.
> > TST_NO_CLEANUP (IMHO should be changed to LTP_NO_CLEANUP).
> Unless we want to have a standard for that one as well. Really all we
> need to is to create a page with the description of these variables and
> agree on a common subset. It's that simple, but someone has to actually
> do it.
I thought this is the page for user defined variables:
https://github.com/linux-test-project/ltp/wiki/User-Guidelines
But we should explain there the exceptions.
Kind regards,
Petr
More information about the ltp
mailing list