Hello all, On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 03:40:03PM +1300, Michael Hudson-Doyle wrote: > [beware of the x-post!] > [resend from correct email address...] > > Hi all, > > As discussed briefly with some of you, I've been hacking on some scripts > to allow us to run some tests / benchmarks that make use of more than > one calxeda node before we get proper support in LAVA. The script is > here: > > http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mwhudson/+junk/highbank-bench-scripts/view/head:/fakedispatcher.py > > but it's pretty terrible code, you probably don't want to look at it.
terrible code, but still pretty cool :) > More interesting might be the test code branch: > > http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~mwhudson/+junk/highbank-bench-1/files > > If it's not clear, the idea here is that: > > 1) devices.yaml file defines roles for nodes and says how many of each > role you want, > 2) the test code branch is copied to each node, > 3) the run-$rolename.sh script is run on each node, > 4) finally the contents of the /lava/results directory on each node is > copied back to the system the tests were run from. > > Coordination between nodes is done via lava-wait-for and lava-send shell > scripts as proposed in the connect session. > > fakedispatcher is invoked with the URL of the test code branch, e.g.: > > python fakedispatcher.py lp:~mwhudson/+junk/highbank-bench-1 Great job! It's very cool that we have an interim sollution for you guys to go ahead with your tests while the LAVA implementation is not ready. > Some notes: > > 1) I hope that using an "API" like that proposed in the connect session > will let us figure out if it's actually a useful api. It would indeed be really useful to have feedback on that API, the sooner the better. > 2) fakedispatcher is still pretty terrible in many ways (e.g. it has a > hardcoded list of (currently just 2) calxeda nodes to use), and > either gives obscure errors or just hangs when things go wrong. > > 3) Despite 2), it does actually work. So I'm pretty happy about that, > and would like to talk to all of you about how to write your test > cases in a form that works with fakedispatcher :) It's worth mentioning that: - porting test cases written for fakedispatcher to LAVA proper should require very low effort. - having such test cases already written is going to help the LAVA implementation a lot in terms of both delivery time and quality. (and we, the LAVA team, might do the necessary porting ourselves) hint, hint ;-) -- Antonio Terceiro Software Engineer - Linaro http://www.linaro.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ linaro-validation mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-validation
