linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] drm/ci: add helper script update-xfails.py

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <785cbfee-f4d3-3d53-a3e6-2f9af8fa05fb@collabora.com>
Date:   Wed, 27 Sep 2023 19:28:39 -0300
From:   Helen Koike <helen.koike@...labora.com>
To:     Sergi Blanch Torne <sergi.blanch.torne@...labora.com>,
        dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org
Cc:     airlied@...il.com, daniel@...ll.ch, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        robdclark@...il.com, daniel@...ishbar.org,
        vignesh.raman@...labora.com, jani.nikula@...ux.intel.com,
        mripard@...nel.org, michel.daenzer@...lbox.org,
        quic_abhinavk@...cinc.com, quic_jesszhan@...cinc.com,
        david.heidelberg@...labora.com, guilherme.gallo@...labora.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] drm/ci: add helper script update-xfails.py

Hi Sergi,

Thanks for your comments.

On 27/09/2023 05:58, Sergi Blanch Torne wrote:
> Hi Helen,
> 
> On Mon, 2023-09-25 at 16:55 -0300, Helen Koike wrote:
>> Hello,
> 
>> This script is being very handy for me, so I suppose it could be
>> handy
>> to others, since I'm publishing it in the xfails folder.
> 
>> Let me know your thoughts.
> 
> I have two suggestions and one comment. Before that, I would like to
> highlight the importance of tools like that to help with repetitive
> tedious work, it is great to have this script.
> 
>> +def get_xfails_file_path(canonical_name, suffix):
>> +    name = canonical_name.replace(":", "-")
>> +    script_dir = os.path.dirname(os.path.abspath(__file__))
>> +    return os.path.join(script_dir, f"{name}-{suffix}.txt")
> 
> I appreciate the correspondence between job name and expectation file
> names.
> 
>> +def get_unit_test_name_and_results(unit_test):
>> +    if "Artifact results/failures.csv not found" in unit_test:
>> +        return None, None
>> +    unit_test_name, unit_test_result = unit_test.strip().split(",")
>> +    return unit_test_name, unit_test_result
> 
> Suggestion: it is not managing empty lines or comments. By now, there
> aren't, but they could be found.

Indeed.

> 
>> +def main(namespace, project, pipeline_id):
>> +    xfails = (
>> +        Collate(namespace=namespace, project=project)
>> +        .from_pipeline(pipeline_id)
>> +        .get_artifact("results/failures.csv")
>> +    )
>> +
>> +    split_unit_test_from_collate(xfails)
>> +
>> +    for job_name in xfails.keys():
>> +        canonical_name = get_canonical_name(job_name)
>> +        fails_txt_path = get_xfails_file_path(canonical_name,
>> "fails")
>> +        flakes_txt_path = get_xfails_file_path(canonical_name,
>> "flakes")
>> +
>> +        fails_txt = read_file(fails_txt_path)
>> +        flakes_txt = read_file(flakes_txt_path)
>> +
>> +        for job_id in xfails[job_name].keys():
>> +            for unit_test in xfails[job_name][job_id]:
>> +                unit_test_name, unit_test_result =
>> get_unit_test_name_and_results(unit_test)
>> +
>> +                if not unit_test_name:
>> +                    continue
>> +
>> +                if is_test_present_on_file(flakes_txt,
>> unit_test_name):
>> +                    remove_unit_test_if_present(flakes_txt,
>> unit_test_name, flakes_txt_path)
>> +                    print("WARNING: unit test is on flakes list but
>> a job failed due to it, "
>> +                          "is your tree up to date?",
>> +                          unit_test_name, "DROPPED FROM",
>> os.path.basename(flakes_txt_path))
>> +
>> +                if unit_test_result == "UnexpectedPass":
>> +                    remove_unit_test_if_present(fails_txt,
>> unit_test_name, fails_txt_path)
>> +                    # flake result
>> +                    if not
>> is_unit_test_present_in_other_jobs(unit_test, xfails[job_name]):
>> +                        add_unit_test_if_not_present(flakes_txt,
>> unit_test_name, flakes_txt_path)
>> +                    continue
> 
> Suggestion: Sometimes tests fails with different status ("Fail" to
> "Crash" for example) and the expectations should be updated with the
> newer status.

The status is only present in the fails and not in the flakes list, so I 
update it with add_unit_test_or_update_result_to_fails_if_present() 
function below, make sense?

Regards,
Helen

> 
>> +
>> +                # flake result
>> +                if not is_unit_test_present_in_other_jobs(unit_test,
>> xfails[job_name]):
>> +                    add_unit_test_if_not_present(flakes_txt,
>> unit_test_name, flakes_txt_path)
>> +                    continue
>> +
>> +                # consistent result
>> +
>> add_unit_test_or_update_result_to_fails_if_present(fails_txt,
>> unit_test,
>> +
>> fails_txt_path)
>> +
>> +        save_file(fails_txt, fails_txt_path)
>> +        save_file(flakes_txt, flakes_txt_path)
> 
> Regards,
>