On 11/15/2012 08:37 PM, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote:
I was recently making some additions to the lava-test-shell code and in
the process more or less had to write some documentation on how things
work. Here is what I wrote (actually what I wrote includes stuff about
test result attachments but that's not in trunk yet):
[snip]
I'm embarrassed for not doing that in my original commit. Thanks.
But the tweaks I want to propose are more to do with what goes into the
/lava/bin and /lava/results directories. For a start, I don't think
it's especially useful that the tests run with lava-test-runner or
lava-test-shell on $PATH -- there's no reason for a test author to call
its mostly harmless. I didn't intended developers to use those two
script. I just thought it might make it easier to not have to call out
the full path to those in our own code.
either of those functions! However I want to add helpers -- called
lava-test-case and lava-test-case-attach in my brain currently:
* lava-test-case will send the test case started signal, run a shell
command, interpret its exit code as a test result and send the test
case stopped signal
* lava-test-case-attach arranges to attach a file to the test result
for a particular test case id
So you could imagine some run steps for an audio capture test:
run:
steps:
- lava-fft -t 3 > generated.wav
- lava-test-case-attach sine-wave generated.wav audio/wav
- lava-test-case sine-wave aplay generated.wav
and appropriate hooks on the host side:
* test case start/stop hooks that would capture audio
* an "analysis hook" that would compare the captured sample with the
attached wav file (and attach the captured wav)
+1 - and I liked your branch that does the attachment logic.
Semi-relatedly, I would like to (at least optionally) store the test
result data more explicitly in the
/lava/results/${IDX}_${TEST_ID}-${TIMESTAMP} directory. Maybe something
like this (in the above style):
# /lava/
# results/
# ... As before
# ${IDX}_${TEST_ID}-${TIMESTAMP}/
# ... All the stuff we had before.
# cases/
# ${TEST_CASE_ID}/
# result This would contain pass/fail/skip/unknown
# units Mb/s, V, W, Hz, whatever
# measurement Self explanatory I expect.
# attachments/
# ${FILENAME} The content of the attachment
# ${FILENAME}.mimetype The mime-type for the attachment
# attributes/
# ${KEY} The content of the file would be the
# value of the attachment.
# ... other things you can stick on test results ...
Basically this would be defining another representation for test
results: on the file system, in addition to the existing two: as JSON or
in a postgres DB.
The reason for doing this is twofold: 1) it's more amenable than JSON to
being incrementally built up by a bunch of shell scripts as a
lava-test-shell test runs and 2) this directory could be presented to an
"analysis hook" written in shell (earlier on today I told Andy Doan that
I though writing hooks in shell would be impractical; now I'm not so
sure). Also: 3) (noone expects the spanish inquisition!) it would allow
us to write a lava-test-shell test that does not depend on parsing
stdout.log.
This sounds good, but I worry how it plays out. Could you elaborate a
little on how you think a person would write such a test? ie - it feels
like we are on the path to becoming not only a test harness but also a
test framework. I guess with the implication of signals and such, we
have to become more of a framework, so I my worry might be unavoidable.
_______________________________________________
linaro-validation mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation
