[lldb-dev] New test summary results formatter

Todd Fiala via lldb-dev lldb-dev at lists.llvm.org
Wed Dec 2 15:06:43 PST 2015 

All good.

Yeah Python 2/3 string/byte handling is one of the trickier areas of
cross-Python version compatibility.

On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:

>  think I got something working, I'll upload a patch in a few.
>
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:10 PM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
>
>> BTW, this is what I do in the swig service, and I think it's the
>> idiomatic way of sending variable length data over a socket.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:08 PM Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think the best solution is going to be to use struct.pack.  Like this
>>> on the writing side:
>>>
>>>         import struct
>>>         msg = cPickle.dumps(test_event)
>>>         packet = struct.pack("!I%ds" % len(msg), len(msg), msg)
>>>         self.out_file.send(packet)
>>>
>>> and like this on the reading side:
>>>
>>>                 self.packet_bytes_remaining = struct.unpack("!I",
>>> self.header_contents)[0]
>>>                 self.header_contents = b""
>>>                 self.reading_header = False
>>>                 return data[(index+1):]
>>>
>>> The current solution still doesn't work because it's calling
>>> socket.send() with a str instead of a bytes.  So it has to be bytes all the
>>> way through.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:48 PM Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Those fixes are up here:
>>>> r254550
>>>>
>>>> Let me know what you see after that, Zachary.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:45 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:42 PM, Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Can you try making those changes in the other spots?  There's a
>>>>>> handful of code you have probably not ever run if you haven't selected
>>>>>> running with a test results formatter.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> I'm actually going to make the ibuffer ones now since it's easier for
>>>>> me to verify that it doesn't break the non-Windows side since I'm right in
>>>>> there now.  If that doesn't do it, we'll need to see what else doesn't work.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If not, I can try to address them tonight or tomorrow night when I
>>>>>> can get to some kind of python 3 setup.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:36 PM, Zachary Turner <zturner at google.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yea I was messing around with it too.  I don't have a fix yet but I
>>>>>>> think you will need to either encode the pickled data as utf8, or better
>>>>>>> yet, don't write this:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "{}#{}".format(...)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> because pickled data is supposed to be binary data anyway.  So use
>>>>>>> bytes.append() instead.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then on the other side in dotest_channels, there's a couple places
>>>>>>> where you do something like:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> self.ibuffer = ""
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> which would need to change to
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> self.ibuffer = b""
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and any other similar operations on self.ibuffer which assume string
>>>>>>> data.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 1:33 PM Todd Fiala <todd.fiala at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -Todd
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -Todd
>>>>
>>>


-- 
-Todd
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20151202/5bb6bb94/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the lldb-dev mailing list