Hi Masahiro-san,
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 11:54 PM, Masahiro Yamada yamada.masahiro@socionext.com wrote:
Hi Joe,
2015-05-30 6:23 GMT+09:00 Joe Hershberger joe.hershberger@ni.com:
This option allows the 'make *_defconfig' step to run against a former repo state, while the savedefconfig step runs against the current repo state. This is convenient for the case where something in the Kconfig has changed such that the defconfig is no longer complete with the new Kconfigs. This feature allows the .config to be built assuming those old Kconfigs, but then savedefconfig based on the new state of the Kconfigs.
Signed-off-by: Joe Hershberger joe.hershberger@ni.com
This idea seems nice, but I have some comments about the implementation.
- defconfig_src_dir = ''
- if options.git_ref:
work_dir = WorkDir()defconfig_src_dir = work_dir.get()cwd = os.getcwd()print 'Cloning git repo for \'make *_defconfig\' step...'You can use signle quotes without escape sequences inside "...", and vice versa.
OK
diff --git a/tools/patman/gitutil.py b/tools/patman/gitutil.py index 9e739d8..138f989 100644 --- a/tools/patman/gitutil.py +++ b/tools/patman/gitutil.py @@ -61,6 +61,21 @@ def CountCommitsToBranch(): patch_count = int(stdout) return patch_count
+def CommitHash(commit_ref):
- """Gets the hash for a commit
- Args:
commit_ref: Commit ref to look up- Return:
Hash of revision, if any, else None- """
- pipe = ['git', 'rev-parse', '--short', commit_ref]
- stdout = command.RunPipe([pipe], capture=True, oneline=True).stdout
- hash = stdout.strip()
- return hash
def NameRevision(commit_hash): """Gets the revision name for a commit
Finally, this tool is going to depend on patman. I am afraid this tool is getting messy.
gitutils.py depends on command.py, and then command.py depends on cros_subprocess.py.
Do you really need to invoke such a chain of libraries to run a sub-process?
Why does that matter?
For example, you can get a hash in a single line like this:
subprocess.check_output(['git', 'rev-parse', '--short', 'HEAD'])
I certainly can do that, but it seems better to reuse the common functionality. This tool doesn't seem so useful elsewhere that a person would want it to work easily outside of u-boot. In u-boot, patman exists. Simon did the same thing for buildman. I can change it to call the git commands directly sine what I'm doing is simple, but I don't see any value in doing it.
Simon, what do you think?
Thanks, -Joe