[llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite

James Henderson via llvm-dev llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Feb 8 03:59:05 PST 2021 

I get 7 failures too, but it's not the same 7. I'm going to have a chat
with some of my colleagues who work on the tool, to figure these out and
will report back.

Failed Tests (7):
  debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_paren.cpp
  debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_paren_mline.cpp
  debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_syntax.cpp
  debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_syntax_mline.cpp
  debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_type.cpp
  debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/subtools/test/err_type_mline.cpp
  debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/unittests/run.test

On Fri, 5 Feb 2021 at 20:47, Alexandre Ganea <alexandre.ganea at ubisoft.com>
wrote:

> The debuginfo-test tests are failing for a long time for us too. I won't
> have much time to fix them in the short term, but here's the errors I'm
> seeing (James do you see the same thing on your end?):
>
> Failed Tests (7):
>   debuginfo-tests ::
> dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_program_state.cpp
>   debuginfo-tests ::
> dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_step_kinds.cpp
>   debuginfo-tests ::
> dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_step_order.cpp
>   debuginfo-tests ::
> dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_watch_type.cpp
>   debuginfo-tests ::
> dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/expect_watch_value.cpp
>   debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/commands/penalty/unreachable.cpp
>   debuginfo-tests :: dexter/feature_tests/unittests/run.test
>
>
> The first ones seem to be related to a missing Python library in my
> installation:
>
> F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe"
> "F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py" list-debuggers
>
> dbgeng [dbgeng]             YES (1)
> lldb   [lldb]               NO  (The system cannot find the file specified
> ["lldb.exe"])
> vs2015 [Visual Studio 2015] NO  (No module named 'win32com')
> vs2017 [Visual Studio 2017] NO  (No module named 'win32com')
> vs2019 [Visual Studio 2019] NO  (No module named 'win32com')
>
>
> Which in turns generates this error:
>
> F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe"
> F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py test --fail-lt 1.0
> -w --builder clang-cl_vs2015 --debugger dbgeng --cflags "/Zi /Od" --ldflags
> "/Zi" --
> F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\feature_tests\commands\penalty\expect_watch_type.cpp
> expect_watch_type.cpp: nan/nan (nan)
> [F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\builder\scripts\windows\clang-cl_vs2015.bat:
> failed with returncode 1. : The system cannot find the path specified.]
>
>
> The last failure (dexter/feature_tests/unittests/run.test) is related to
> slash vs. backslash:
>
> F:\aganea\llvm-project>"C:/Program Files/Python39/python.exe"
> "F:/aganea/llvm-project/debuginfo-tests\dexter\dexter.py"
> "--unittest=show-all"
>
> test_get_script_environment (builder.Builder.TestBuilder) ... ok
> test_parse_bad_whitespace (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
> Throw exception when parsing badly formed whitespace. ... ok
> test_parse_empty (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
> Empty files are silently ignored. ... ok
> test_parse_escaped (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
> Escaped commands are ignored. ... ok
> test_parse_good_whitespace (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
> Try to emulate python whitespace rules ... ok
> test_parse_inline (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
> Commands can be embedded in other text. ... ok
> test_parse_multi_line_comment (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
> Multi-line commands can embed comments. ... ok
> test_parse_share_line (command.ParseCommand.TestParseCommand)
> More than one command can appear on one line. ... ok
> test_add_breakpoint_no_source_root_dir
> (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... ok
> test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir
> (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... FAIL
> test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir_slash_suffix
> (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... ok
> test_get_step_info (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... FAIL
> test_get_step_info_no_frames (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ...
> ok
> test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir
> (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase) ... FAIL
> test_did_you_mean (utils.ExtArgParse.TestExtArgumentParser) ... ok
> test_PreserveAutoColors (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
> test_auto (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
> test_blue (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
> test_default (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
> test_green (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
> test_red (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
> test_tags (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
> test_yellow (utils.PrettyOutputBase.TestPrettyOutput) ... ok
> test_sanity (utils.UnitTests.TestUnitTests) ... ok
>
> ======================================================================
> FAIL: test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir
> (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File
> "F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py",
> line 245, in test_add_breakpoint_with_source_root_dir
>     self.assertEqual('some_file', self.dbg.breakpoint_file)
> AssertionError: 'some_file' != '/some_file'
> - some_file
> + /some_file
> ? +
>
>
> ======================================================================
> FAIL: test_get_step_info (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File
> "F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py",
> line 268, in test_get_step_info
>     self.assertEqual([None, '/other/file', '/my_root/some_file'],
> AssertionError: Lists differ: [None, '/other/file', '/my_root/some_file']
> != [None, '\\other\\file', '\\dbg\\some_file']
>
> First differing element 1:
> '/other/file'
> '\\other\\file'
>
> - [None, '/other/file', '/my_root/some_file']
> + [None, '\\other\\file', '\\dbg\\some_file']
>
> ======================================================================
> FAIL: test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir
> (debugger.DebuggerBase.TestDebuggerBase)
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Traceback (most recent call last):
>   File
> "F:\aganea\llvm-project\debuginfo-tests\dexter\dex\debugger\DebuggerBase.py",
> line 254, in test_get_step_info_no_source_root_dir
>     self.assertEqual(['/root/some_file'],
> AssertionError: Lists differ: ['/root/some_file'] != ['\\root\\some_file']
>
> First differing element 0:
> '/root/some_file'
> '\\root\\some_file'
>
> - ['/root/some_file']
> ?   ^    ^
>
> + ['\\root\\some_file']
> ?   ^^    ^^
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ran 24 tests in 0.005s
>
> FAILED (failures=3)
>
> error: unit test failures
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> De la part de David
> Blaikie via llvm-dev
> Envoyé : February 5, 2021 1:50 PM
> À : James Henderson <jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk>; Reid Kleckner <
> rnk at google.com>; Amy Huang <akhuang at google.com>
> Cc : llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>; David Greene <
> greened at obbligato.org>
> Objet : Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite
>
> Reid and Amy might have some context for Windows (though I don't know if
> any Windows folks have done much with this test suite).
>
> On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 7:38 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> >
> > Given that the debuginfo tests already have cross-project dependencies,
> I figured I'd try adapting them instead. I've updated
> https://reviews.llvm.org/D95339 accordingly. Ideally, I think making the
> existing debug-info tests a subdirectory, and renaming the top-level
> directory, might be a good idea, but I haven't really come to any
> conclusions about that yet.
> >
> > I also found that several of the existing debuginfo-test tests fail for
> me. Are these tests expected to work on Windows? If so, are there any
> slightly more unusual prerequisites that I might be missing?
> >
> > What do people think?
> >
> > James
> >
> > On Wed, 27 Jan 2021 at 15:40, <paul.robinson at sony.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of David
> >> > Greene via llvm-dev
> >> > Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2021 10:29 AM
> >> > To: jh7370.2008 at my.bristol.ac.uk; llvm-dev
> >> > <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
> >> > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] [RFC] Cross-project lit test suite
> >> >
> >> > James Henderson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> writes:
> >> >
> >> > > Currently, there is no location where lit tests that use both
> >> > > clang and
> >> > LLD
> >> > > can be put, whilst the llvm-symbolizer cases I’ve hit are testing
> >> > > llvm-symbolizer (and not LLD), so don’t really fit in the LLD
> >> > > test
> >> > suite. I
> >> > > therefore have prototyped a lit test suite that would be part of
> >> > > the monorepo, and which can support tests that use elements from
> >> > > multiple projects - see
> >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://reviews.llvm.org/D95339__;!!Jmo
> >> > ZiZGBv3
> >> > RvKRSx!vWidWrbKJid6-eIKVUT-dGDzcG-65TMZMzhyd33jgyBwi7p-JRSgFVZkxqKC
> >> > vkqW4A$
> >> > . Tests could be added to
> >> > > this suite as needed. The suite is modelled as an additional
> >> > > top-level directory, and is enabled by enabling the
> >> > > “cross-project-tests” project
> >> > in
> >> > > CMake.
> >> >
> >> > This is fantastic!
> >> >
> >> > > Back in October 2019, there was an extensive discussion on
> >> > > end-to-end testing and how to write them (starting from
> >> > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-
> >> > dev/2019-October/063509.html__;!!JmoZiZGBv3RvKRSx!vWidWrbKJid6-eIKV
> >> > UT- dGDzcG-65TMZMzhyd33jgyBwi7p-JRSgFVZkxqJU8k_M_Q$ ).
> >> > > The suggestion was that these tests would be lit-based and run as
> >> > > part of check-all, and would not be inside the clang tree,
> >> > > although there was some opposition. This concluded with a round
> >> > > table. Unfortunately, I am unaware of what the conclusion of that
> >> > > round table conversation was, so it’s possible that what I am
> >> > > proposing is redundant/being worked on by someone else.
> >> >
> >> > I started that thread and IIRC we ended up with the suggestion that
> >> > such tests should live in test-suite.  As you noted having tests
> >> > separated from the monorepo is less than ideal.  I haven't done
> >> > anything with this conclusion yet, mostly due to lack of time.  If
> >> > your proposal gains traction I would like to see if we could build
> >> > end-to-end testing on top of it.
> >> >
> >> > > Additionally, I don’t consider all classes of tests that the
> >> > > proposed lit suite would be useful for to be “end-to-end” testing.
> >> >
> >> > Agreed.  There are various classes of tests that could make use of
> >> > your proposed layout, one of which is "end-to-end."  Your proposal
> >> > doesn't provide end-to-end testing per se, but it does make adding
> >> > end-to-end tests later on more straightforward.
> >> >
> >> >              -David
> >>
> >> I think a useful distinction here is that lit tests are generally
> >> very focused on a specific feature/function, where test-suite has a
> >> much broader scope.  Another slice at it would be that lit tests tend
> >> to be "regression" tests, while test-suite is more of an "integration"
> suite.
> >>
> >> I am not a QA person so I may be abusing some of these terms, but
> >> that's how I look at it.  Sometimes writing that focused lit test
> >> ends up depending on multiple tools, and the cross-project lit suite
> >> would be a good place to drop those; debuginfo-tests is a prime example.
> >> --paulr
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20210208/2d07e2aa/attachment.html>

More information about the llvm-dev mailing list