Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fixing constant cleaning when compiling tests #2712

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 26, 2016

Conversation

bridadan
Copy link
Contributor

@bridadan bridadan commented Sep 14, 2016

This PR was spurred in response to ARMmbed/mbed-cli#344, however it has larger implications to make the implementation cleaner and to provide a more consistent experience when building tests.

Description

This addresses the issue where building tests via test.py always triggered
a clean build. This is because the mbed_config.h file was being deleted from
the shared OS build to ensure that the correct config was always being
used. However, this constantly triggered a rebuild of the OS since the
config file was not present.

Due to the shared build, having multiple app configurations that could
override the OS settings is not possible. For this reason, we now ignore
app config files unless explicitly set via the command line option
'--app-config'. Though there will now be two mbed_config.h files in the
include path of the build, it shouldn't matter since the contents will be
the same.

Status

READY

Migrations

If this PR changes any APIs or behaviors, give a short description of what API users should do when this PR is merged.

YES (potentially, pending feedback from @AlessandroA)

@AlessandroA from the conversation we had on #2397, it seemed like you were going to be using mbed_app.json files in each test case folder to get configuration for tests. Would this PR break your tests? Or are you already using the --app_config option for mbed test? In that case, this PR shouldn't affect your workflow.

Todos

Also, @sg- we discussed this offline but if you have a moment, would confirm the strategy I implemented here is consistent with what you had in mind?

Copy link
Contributor

@theotherjimmy theotherjimmy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like the docs update! LGTM.

@sg-
Copy link
Contributor

sg- commented Sep 22, 2016

@bridadan needs a conflict resolved.

@AlessandroA bump for a review of the PR description

Copy link
Contributor

@AlessandroA AlessandroA left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@bridadan Yes, we can now use --app-config for that purpose, so our workflow is not affected by this PR! LGTM 👍

This addresses the issue where building tests via test.py always triggered
a clean build. This is because the mbed_config.h file was being deleted from
the shared OS build to ensure that the correct config was always being
used. However, this contanstly triggered a rebuild of the OS since the
config file was not present.

Due to the shared build, having multiple app configurations that could
override the OS settings is not possible. For this reason, we now ignore
app config files unless explicitly set via the command line option
'--app-config'. Though there will now be two mbed_config.h files in the
include path of the build, it shouldn't matter since the contents will be
the same.
@bridadan
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @AlessandroA!

@sg- rebased, re-triggering tests.

/morph test

@mbed-bot
Copy link

Result: SUCCESS

Your command has finished executing! Here's what you wrote!

/morph test

Output

mbed Build Number: 926

All builds and test passed!

@bogdanm
Copy link
Contributor

bogdanm commented Sep 23, 2016

👍

@bridadan
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mazimkhan Would you mind checking to see if the two Cambridge CI failures were due to this PR? Should this be blocked by them?

@0xc0170
Copy link
Contributor

0xc0170 commented Sep 26, 2016

@mazimkhan Would you mind checking to see if the two Cambridge CI failures were due to this PR? Should this be blocked by them?

It's not , those failures have been here few days ago. I'll talk to @mazimkhan to get details how to fix them

Edit: those jobs are going to be updated today, that will be resolved. It's an issue elsewhere.

@0xc0170 0xc0170 merged commit 93e9b48 into ARMmbed:master Sep 26, 2016
@mazimkhan
Copy link

retest uvisor

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants