Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] tools/tests: test harness fragment

[Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

On 26.02.2026 01:51, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Feb 2026, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> On 13.02.2026 03:49, dmukhin@xxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> This series introduces the use of a new common unit test fragment across
>>> several existing unit tests.
>>>
>>> Patch 1 contains assorted fixups for the domid Makefile.
>>> Patch 2 adds a new fragment for auto-generating test harness dependencies.
>>> Patch 3 adds some prerequisite changes for vPCI test (patch 4).
>>> Patch 4 switches the vPCI unit test to the new common fragment.
>>> Patch 5 switches the PDX unit test to the new common fragment.
>>>
>>> [1] Link to v2: 
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/xen-devel/20260111041145.553673-1-dmukhin@xxxxxxxx/
>>> [2] CI: 
>>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/people/dmukhin/xen/-/pipelines/2323352235
>>>
>>> Denis Mukhin (5):
>>>   tests: fixup domid make fragment
>>>   tests: use unit test fragment in domid test
>>>   xen/include: customize headers for host builds
>>>   tests: use unit test fragment in vPCI test
>>>   tests: use unit test fragment in PDX test
>>
>> I remain unconvinced of this attempt to generalize things. Yes, it eliminates
>> some redundancy, but at the same time some of the new constructs are harder
>> to read / follow. Perhaps it would help if smaller pieces were abstracted out
>> first / incrementally.
> 
> I don't think breaking it down further would help, it is already in
> pretty small pieces. At least, I cannot think of a way that breaking it
> down would make a difference. Do you have something specific in mind?

See Edwin's series moving in effectively the same direction.

> Also, I appreciate you being unconvinced about this series, but now it
> leaves me in a bit of limbo. I am fine with this series going in --
> should I continue reviewing it regardless?

Hard to say. Maybe take a look at Edwin's first?

Jan