On 09/11/2018 04:51 PM, PiBa-NL wrote:
Hi List,

Hi,


I was wondering how to best run the reg-tests that are 'valid' for FreeBSD.

There are a 2 tests that use abns@ sockets, which seem not available on FreeBSD. Also 1 test is failing for a reason i'm not totally sure if its totally expected to or not..

- /connection/b00000.vtc
probably does not 'really' need abns@ sockets, so changing to unix@ would make it testable on more platforms?

Correct. I agree I did not think to replace this part specific to Linux.

- /log/b00000.vtc
Not exactly sure why this fails/why it was supposed to work.
It either produces a timeout, or the s1 server fails to read the request which the tcp-healthcheck does not send..

     ***  s1    0.0 accepted fd 5 127.0.0.1 23986
     **   s1    0.0 === rxreq
     ---- s1    0.0 HTTP rx failed (fd:5 read: Connection reset by peer)

Perhaps the syslog traces could give us more information about what is happening here.

- /seamless-reload/b00000.vtc
This one specifically mentions testing a abns@ socket functionality. so changing it to a unix@ socket likely changes the test in such a way its no longer testing what it was meant for..
What would be the best way to skip this test on FreeBSD?

Perhaps we should use the TARGET value to select the VTC files directories which should be selected for the OSes.

By default for linux all VTC files in reg-tests directory should be run (found with find command without -L option, so that not to follow the symbolic link).

For instance for freebsd OS we would create reg-tests/freebsd directory
with symbolic links to the linux reg-tests subdirectories it supports.


With a few small changes (attached) i can run all tests like this, get the following result:

varnishtest -l ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/*/*.vtc
#    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/connection/b00000.vtc passed (0.142) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/log/b00000.vtc passed (0.136) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/lua/b00000.vtc passed (0.121) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/lua/b00001.vtc passed (0.133) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/lua/b00002.vtc passed (0.186) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/lua/b00003.vtc passed (0.133) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/lua/h00001.vtc passed (0.120) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/seamless-reload/b00000.vtc passed (0.143) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/spoe/b00000.vtc passed (0.011) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/ssl/b00000.vtc passed (0.146) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/stick-table/b00000.vtc passed (0.120) #    top  TEST ./work/haproxy-ss-20180901/reg-tests/stick-table/b00001.vtc passed (0.122)

Above would be good :).. But well.. needs changing or skipping some tests..

I would like to know next time that 'all' testable reg-tests are working properly when making a new build to take into my production system. If some tests fail by design (on this platform), it takes more administration to figure out if that was okay or not.

Please advice :)

Regards,

PiBa-NL (Pieter)



Reply via email to