[Fuego] cyclictest patches

[Daniel Sangorrin]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bird, Timothy [mailto:Tim.Bird at sony.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2017 2:28 AM
> To: Daniel Sangorrin; fuego at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: RE: [Fuego] cyclictest patches
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Daniel Sangorrin on Tuesday, October 31, 2017 9:40 AM
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: fuego-bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org [mailto:fuego-
> > bounces at lists.linuxfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Daniel Sangorrin
> > > I have modified the cyclictest benchmark test.
> > >
> > > - cyclictest: update source code tarball
> > >
> > > The previous source code was too old and lacked some important
> > > flags. I added a patch to build the test for toolchains based on
> > > old kernels (maybe this should be upstream)
> > >
> > > TODO: rt-tests contains other tests that are already in Fuego
> > > and can share the same tarball.
> > > TODO: cyclictest requires some disturbance running in
> > > background.
> >
> > Note: this patch is on my master branch (it was too big for the mailing list).
> 
> Is this tarball made on your system, or does it come from some public source?
> In general, I'd like to avoid custom-made tarballs in Fuego.  If it's
> normal cyclictest source, with some extra custom sauce, I think it would
> be better to keep the 2 parts separate, so it's easier to update.

Sorry, it comes from https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/rt-tests/
You can check the integrity with sha256sums.asc.
However, I also prefer using the git version. Let me resend the patches.

Thanks
Daniel


> 
> I'll take a look and let you know what I think.
>  -- Tim