On Mon, 3 Nov 2025 05:12:43 +0000 Hangbin Liu wrote: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 11:24:06AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > I just do `make install` in tools/net/ynl. Both the ynl scripts and specs > > > are > > > installed. So I think the specs are also tested. > > > > > > I didn't get here. The `ynl` calls pyynl.cli:main, that should be enough. > > > Do you mean we should find the `cli.py` path and call it like > > > `$source_code/tools/net/ynl/pyynl/cli.py --spec > > > $source_code/Documentation/netlink/specs/xxx.yaml ...`? > > > > More or less. But it needs to know how to install itself when kernel > > selftests are installed. Maybe it's not worth the complexity and we > > should add the script under tools/net/ynl. Easier to refer from there. > > Hmm, how should we execute the script under `tools/net/ynl`? Use the cli.py > like: > > ./cli.py --spec ../../../Documentation/netlink/specs/xxx.yaml > > Or use the installed name `ynl` > > ynl --family xxx ...
I think under tools/net we don't have the kernel selftest infra. This is not great because we lose the integration benefits, but it gives us the ability to.. do whatever want.. I think relative paths would be fine? I believe that if you run cli from its directory you can use --family and it will refer to the in-tree specs automagically ?
