[lldb-dev] [llvm-dev] Running lit (googletest) tests remotely

[David Blaikie via lldb-dev]

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 10:44 AM Matthias Braun via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:

>
> > On May 31, 2017, at 4:06 AM, Pavel Labath <labath at google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you all for the pointers. I am going to look at these to see if
> > there is anything that we could reuse, and come back. In the mean
> > time, I'll reply to Mathiass's comments:
> >
> > On 26 May 2017 at 19:11, Matthias Braun <mbraun at apple.com> wrote:
> >>> Based on a not-too-detailed examination of the lit codebase, it does
> >>> not seem that it would be too difficult to add this capability: During
> >>> test discovery phase, we could copy the required files to the remote
> >>> host. Then, when we run the test, we could just prefix the run command
> >>> similarly to how it is done for running the tests under valgrind. It
> >>> would be up to the user to provide a suitable command for copying and
> >>> running files on the remote host (using rsync, ssh, telnet or any
> >>> other transport he chooses).
> >>
> >> This seems to be the crux to me: What does "required files" mean?
> >> - All the executables mentioned in the RUN line? What llvm was compiled
> as a library, will we copy those too?
> > For executables, I was considering just listing them explicitly (in
> > lit.local.cfg, I guess), although parsing the RUN line should be
> > possible as well. Even with RUN parsing, I expect we would some way to
> > explicitly add files to the copy list (e.g. for lldb tests we also
> > need to copy the program we are going to debug).

>
> > As for libraries, I see a couple of solutions:
> > - declare these configurations unsupported for remote executions
> > - copy over ALL shared libraries
> > - have automatic tracking of runtime dependencies - all of this
> > information should pass through llvm_add_library macro, so it should
> > be mostly a matter of exporting this information out of cmake.
> > These can be combined in the sense that we can start in the
> > "unsupported" state, and then add some support for it once there is a
> > need for it (we don't need it right now).
> Sounds good. An actively managed list of files to copy in the lit
> configuration is a nice simple solution provided we have some regularily
> running public bot so we can catch missing things. But I assume setting up
> a bot was your plan anyway.
>
> >
> >> - Can tests include other files? Do they need special annotations for
> that?
> > My initial idea was to just copy over all files in the Inputs folder.
> > Do you know of any other dependencies that I should consider?
> I didn't notice that we had already developed a convention with the
> "Inputs" folders, so I guess all that is left to do is making sure all
> tests actually follow that convention.
>

The Google-internal execution of LLVM's tests relies on this property - so
at least for the common tests and the targets Google cares about, this
property is pretty well enforced.


>
> >
> >>
> >> As another example: The llvm-testsuite can perform remote runs
> (test-suite/litsupport/remote.py if you want to see the implementation)
> that code makes the assumption that the remote devices has an NFS mount so
> the relevant parts of the filesystem look alike on the host and remote
> device. I'm not sure that is the best solution as NFS introduces its own
> sort of flakiness and potential skew in I/O heavy benchmarks but it avoids
> the question of what to copy to the device.
> >
> > Requiring an NFS mount is a non-starter for us (no way to get an
> > android device to create one), although if we would be able to hook in
> > a custom script which does a copy to simulate the "mount", we might be
> > able to work with it. Presently I am mostly thinking about correctness
> > tests, and I am not worried about benchmark skews
>
> Sure, I don't think I would end up with an NFS mount strategy if I would
> start fresh today. Also the test-suite benchmarks (esp. the SPEC) ones tend
> to have more complicated harder to track inputs.
>
> - Matthias
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/lldb-dev/attachments/20170601/2f3cde92/attachment-0001.html>