[lldb-dev] New test summary results formatter

Todd Fiala via lldb-dev lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Dec 2 13:33:54 PST 2015 

I think I know how to fix.  Trying now.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think I can fix the issue without you debugging.
>
> Getting the single pass test runner to use it isn't impossible but will
> take some work.  Can you direct-send me the backtrace from the point of
> failure from your system?  Thanks!
>
> -Todd
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 12:34 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Is there any way to force the single process test runner to use this same
>> system?  I'm trying to debug the problem, but this codepath doesn't execute
>> in the single process test runner, and it executes in the child process in
>> the multiprocess test runner.  Basically I need the following callstack to
>> execute in the single process test runner:
>>
>> Command invoked: C:\Python35\python_d.exe
>> D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\test\dotest.py -q --arch=i686 --executable
>> D:/src/llvmbuild/ninja_py35/bin/lldb.exe -s
>> D:/src/llvmbuild/ninja_py35/lldb-test-traces -u CXXFLAGS -u CFLAGS
>> --enable-crash-dialog -C d:\src\llvmbuild\ninja_release\bin\clang.exe
>> --results-port 60794 --inferior -p TestIntegerTypesExpr.py
>> D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test --event-add-entries
>> worker_index=7:int
>> 411 out of 412 test suites processed - TestIntegerTypesExpr.py
>> Traceback (most recent call last):
>>   File "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\test\dotest.py", line 7, in <module>
>>     lldbsuite.test.run_suite()
>>   File "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\dotest.py",
>> line 1476, in run_suite
>>     setupTestResults()
>>   File "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\dotest.py",
>> line 982, in setupTestResults
>>     results_formatter_object.handle_event(initialize_event)
>>   File
>> "D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test\test_results.py",
>> line 1033, in handle_event
>>     "{}#{}".format(len(pickled_message), pickled_message))
>> TypeError: a bytes-like object is required, not 'str'
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:40 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> When I run this under Python 3 I get "A bytes object is used like a
>>> string" on Line 1033 of test_results.py.  I'm going to dig into it a little
>>> bit, but maybe you know off the top of your head the right way to fix it.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:32 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh yea, I made up that decorator idea because I didn't know all the
>>>> formatters were derived from a common base.  But your idea is better if
>>>> everything is derived from a common base.  To be honest you could even just
>>>> generate an error if there are two ResultsFormatter derived classes in the
>>>> same module.  We should be encouraging more smaller files with single
>>>> responsibility.  One of the things I plan to do as part of some cleanup in
>>>> a week or two is to split up dotest, dosep, and lldbtest.py into a couple
>>>> different files by breaking out things like TestBase, etc into separate
>>>> files.  So that it's easier to keep a mental map of where different code is.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:26 AM Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:20 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yeah I'd be good with that.  I can change that as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:10 AM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Also another stylistic suggestion.  I've been thinking about how to
>>>>>>> more logically organize all the source files now that we have a package.
>>>>>>> So it makes sense conceptually to group all of the different result
>>>>>>> formatters under a subpackage called formatters.  So right now you've got
>>>>>>> lldbsuite.test.basic_results_formatter.BasicResultsFormatter but it
>>>>>>> might make sense for this to be
>>>>>>> lldbsuite.test.formatters.basic.BasicResultsFormatter.  If you do things
>>>>>>> this way, it can actually result in a substantially shorter command line,
>>>>>>> because the --results-formatter option can use lldbsuite.test.formatters as
>>>>>>> a starting point.  So you could instead write:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> test/dotest.py --results-formatter basic
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> dotest then looks for a `basic.py` module in the
>>>>>>> `lldbsuite.test.formatters` package, looks for a class inside with a
>>>>>>> @result_formatter decorator, and instantiates that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This has the advantage of making the command line shorter *and* a
>>>>>>> more logical source file organization.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> The other thing that could allow me to do is possibly short-circuit
>>>>> the results formatter specifier so that, if just the module is specified,
>>>>> and if the module only has one ResultsFormatter-derived class, I can
>>>>> probably rig up code that figures out the right results formatter,
>>>>> shortening the required discriminator to something even shorter (i.e.
>>>>> module.classname becomes just module.)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:04 AM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can --results-file=stdout be the default so that we don't have to
>>>>>>>> specify that?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:02 AM Todd Fiala via lldb-dev <
>>>>>>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Also, all the text in the summary is fixed-width lined up nicely,
>>>>>>>>> which may not show in the commit message description if you're using a
>>>>>>>>> variable-width font.  On a terminal it looks nice.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 11:01 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 10:57 AM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I just put up an optional test results formatter that is a
>>>>>>>>>>> prototype of what we may move towards for our default test summary
>>>>>>>>>>> results.  It went in here:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> r254530
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> and you can try it out with something like:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> time test/dotest.py --executable `pwd`/build/Debug/lldb
>>>>>>>>>>> --results-formatter
>>>>>>>>>>> lldbsuite.test.basic_results_formatter.BasicResultsFormatter --results-file
>>>>>>>>>>> st
>>>>>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I cut and paste my line, but more than likely for most people
>>>>>>>>>> you'd just want this:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> test/dotest.py --results-formatter
>>>>>>>>>> lldbsuite.test.basic_results_formatter.BasicResultsFormatter --results-file
>>>>>>>>>> stdout
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The other stuff was specific to my setup.  That line assumes you
>>>>>>>>>> run from the lldb source dir root.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Let me know if this satisfies the basic needs of counts and
>>>>>>>>>>> whatnot.  It counts test method runs rather than all the oddball "file,
>>>>>>>>>>> class, etc." counts we had before.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It prints out the Details section when there are details, and
>>>>>>>>>>> keeps it nice and clean when there are none.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It also mentions a bit about test reruns up top, but that won't
>>>>>>>>>>> come into play until I get the multi-test-pass, single-worker/low-load
>>>>>>>>>>> mechanism in place, which will depend on newer rerun count awareness
>>>>>>>>>>> support.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The change also cleans up places where the test event framework
>>>>>>>>>>> was using string codes and replaces them with symbolic constants.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Let me know what you think.  I can tweak it as needed to address
>>>>>>>>>>> testbot and other needs.  Once it looks reasonable, I'd like to move over
>>>>>>>>>>> to using it by default in the parallel test runner rather than the legacy
>>>>>>>>>>> support.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> lldb-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>> lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>
>>>>
>
>
> --
> -Todd
>



-- 
-Todd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20151202/57c03749/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the lldb-dev mailing list