[RFC,v2,1/2] dts: add smoke tests
Checks
Commit Message
From: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
Adds a new test suite for running smoke tests that verify general
configuration aspects of the system under test. If any of these tests
fail, the DTS execution terminates as part of a "fail-fast" model.
Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
---
dts/conf.yaml | 9 ++
dts/framework/config/__init__.py | 21 +++++
dts/framework/config/conf_yaml_schema.json | 32 ++++++-
dts/framework/dts.py | 19 +++-
dts/framework/exception.py | 11 +++
dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py | 6 +-
.../remote_session/remote/__init__.py | 28 ++++++
dts/framework/test_result.py | 13 ++-
dts/framework/test_suite.py | 24 ++++-
dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py | 5 +
.../interactive_apps/__init__.py | 6 ++
.../interactive_apps/interactive_command.py | 57 +++++++++++
.../interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py | 24 +++++
dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py | 2 +
dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py | 6 ++
dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py | 94 +++++++++++++++++++
16 files changed, 348 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
create mode 100644 dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
Comments
Hi Jeremy, first, a few general points:
1. Send patches to maintainers (Thomas, me, Honnappa, Lijuan and
anyone else involved with DTS or who might be interested) and add the
devlist to cc.
2. Run the linter script before submitting.
3. The use of the various nested objects breaks the current
abstractions. The basic idea is that the test suite developers should
ideally only use the sut/tg node objects and those objects should
delegate logic further to their nested objects. More below.
I have many comments about the implementation, but I haven't run it
yet. I'm going to do that after this round of comments and I may have
more ideas.
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 9:28 PM <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
> From: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
>
> Adds a new test suite for running smoke tests that verify general
> configuration aspects of the system under test. If any of these tests
> fail, the DTS execution terminates as part of a "fail-fast" model.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> ---
> dts/conf.yaml | 9 ++
> dts/framework/config/__init__.py | 21 +++++
> dts/framework/config/conf_yaml_schema.json | 32 ++++++-
> dts/framework/dts.py | 19 +++-
> dts/framework/exception.py | 11 +++
> dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py | 6 +-
> .../remote_session/remote/__init__.py | 28 ++++++
> dts/framework/test_result.py | 13 ++-
> dts/framework/test_suite.py | 24 ++++-
> dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py | 5 +
> .../interactive_apps/__init__.py | 6 ++
> .../interactive_apps/interactive_command.py | 57 +++++++++++
> .../interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py | 24 +++++
> dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py | 2 +
> dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py | 6 ++
> dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py | 94 +++++++++++++++++++
> 16 files changed, 348 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
Let's not add any more levels. I don't like even the current hw
subdirectory (which I want to remove in the docs patch) and we don't
need it. I'd also like to move this functionality into remote_session,
as it's handling a type of remote session.
> create mode 100644 dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
>
> diff --git a/dts/conf.yaml b/dts/conf.yaml
> index a9bd8a3e..042ef954 100644
> --- a/dts/conf.yaml
> +++ b/dts/conf.yaml
> @@ -10,13 +10,22 @@ executions:
> compiler_wrapper: ccache
> perf: false
> func: true
> + nics: #physical devices to be used for testing
> + - addresses:
> + - "0000:11:00.0"
> + - "0000:11:00.1"
> + driver: "i40e"
> + vdevs: #names of virtual devices to be used for testing
> + - "crypto_openssl"
I believe we specified the NICs under SUTs in the original DTS, just
as Owen did in his internal GitLab patch. If you can access it, have a
look at how he did it.
This brings an interesting question of where we want to specify which
NICs/vdevs to test. It could be on the SUT level, but also on the
execution or even the build target level. This should be informed by
testing needs. What makes the most sense? We could specify NIC details
per SUT/TG and then just reference the NICs on the execution/build
target level.
> test_suites:
> + - smoke_tests
> - hello_world
> system_under_test: "SUT 1"
> nodes:
> - name: "SUT 1"
> hostname: sut1.change.me.localhost
> user: root
> + password: ""
This was deliberately left out to discourage the use of passwords.
> arch: x86_64
> os: linux
> lcores: ""
<snip>
> diff --git a/dts/framework/dts.py b/dts/framework/dts.py
> index 05022845..0d03e158 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/dts.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/dts.py
> @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
>
> import sys
>
> +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError
> +
> from .config import CONFIGURATION, BuildTargetConfiguration, ExecutionConfiguration
> from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
> from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, ExecutionResult, Result
> @@ -49,6 +51,7 @@ def run_all() -> None:
> nodes[sut_node.name] = sut_node
>
> if sut_node:
> + #SMOKE TEST EXECUTION GOES HERE!
> _run_execution(sut_node, execution, result)
>
> except Exception as e:
> @@ -118,7 +121,7 @@ def _run_build_target(
>
> try:
> sut_node.set_up_build_target(build_target)
> - result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
> + # result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
> build_target_result.update_setup(Result.PASS)
> except Exception as e:
> dts_logger.exception("Build target setup failed.")
> @@ -146,6 +149,7 @@ def _run_suites(
> with possibly only a subset of test cases.
> If no subset is specified, run all test cases.
> """
> + end_execution = False
This only ends the build target stage, not the execution stage. We
should either find a better name for the variable or make sure that
the whole execution is blocked. I think we're aiming for the latter -
maybe we could just check whether the last exception in result is a
BlockingTestSuiteError (or better, just call a new method of result
that will check that), which we could do at multiple stages.
> for test_suite_config in execution.test_suites:
> try:
> full_suite_path = f"tests.TestSuite_{test_suite_config.test_suite}"
> @@ -160,13 +164,24 @@ def _run_suites(
>
> else:
> for test_suite_class in test_suite_classes:
> + #HERE NEEDS CHANGING
> test_suite = test_suite_class(
> sut_node,
> test_suite_config.test_cases,
> execution.func,
> build_target_result,
> + sut_node._build_target_config,
> + result
> )
> - test_suite.run()
> + try:
> + test_suite.run()
> + except BlockingTestSuiteError as e:
> + dts_logger.exception("An error occurred within a blocking TestSuite, execution will now end.")
> + result.add_error(e)
> + end_execution = True
> + #if a blocking test failed and we need to bail out of suite executions
> + if end_execution:
> + break
>
>
> def _exit_dts() -> None:
> diff --git a/dts/framework/exception.py b/dts/framework/exception.py
> index ca353d98..4e3f63d1 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/exception.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/exception.py
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ class ErrorSeverity(IntEnum):
> SSH_ERR = 4
> DPDK_BUILD_ERR = 10
> TESTCASE_VERIFY_ERR = 20
> + BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR = 25
>
>
> class DTSError(Exception):
> @@ -144,3 +145,13 @@ def __init__(self, value: str):
>
> def __str__(self) -> str:
> return repr(self.value)
> +
> +class BlockingTestSuiteError(DTSError):
> + suite_name: str
> + severity: ClassVar[ErrorSeverity] = ErrorSeverity.BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR
> +
> + def __init__(self, suite_name:str) -> None:
> + self.suite_name = suite_name
> +
> + def __str__(self) -> str:
> + return f"Blocking suite {self.suite_name} failed."
> diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> index 4c48ae25..22776bc1 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
> from framework.testbed_model import LogicalCore
> from framework.utils import EnvVarsDict, MesonArgs
>
> -from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session
> +from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session, create_interactive_session
> +
> +from paramiko import SSHClient
>
>
> class OSSession(ABC):
> @@ -26,6 +28,7 @@ class OSSession(ABC):
> name: str
> _logger: DTSLOG
> remote_session: RemoteSession
> + _interactive_session: SSHClient
>
> def __init__(
> self,
> @@ -37,6 +40,7 @@ def __init__(
> self.name = name
> self._logger = logger
> self.remote_session = create_remote_session(node_config, name, logger)
> + self._interactive_session = create_interactive_session(node_config, name, logger)
This session should be stored in SutNode (it should be os-agnostic
(the apps should behave the same on all os's, right?) and SutNode
could use it without accessing another object), but created in
OSSession (this way we make sure any os-specific inputs (such as
paths) are passed properly).
>
> def close(self, force: bool = False) -> None:
> """
> diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> index 8a151221..abca8edc 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> @@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
> from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
> from .ssh_session import SSHSession
>
> +from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
> +from framework.utils import GREEN
>
> def create_remote_session(
> node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> ) -> RemoteSession:
> return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
> +
> +def create_interactive_session(
> + node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> +) -> SSHClient:
> + """
> + Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used for interactive shells
> +
> + This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and may never be utilized
> + """
> + client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
> + client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
> + ip: str = node_config.hostname
> + logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
Using colors is a remnant from the original DTS. If we want to
(re-)introduce colors I'd do that in a separate patch in a uniform
manner.
> + #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
> + port: int = 22
This configuration handling should be moved to NodeConfiguration.
The logic should also be moved to InteractiveScriptHandler. We also
probably don't need a factory for this.
> + if ":" in node_config.hostname:
> + ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
> + port = int(port)
> + client.connect(
> + ip,
> + username=node_config.user,
> + port=port,
> + password=node_config.password or "",
> + timeout=20 if port else 10
> + )
> + return client
> diff --git a/dts/framework/test_result.py b/dts/framework/test_result.py
> index 74391982..77202ae2 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/test_result.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/test_result.py
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> import os.path
> from collections.abc import MutableSequence
> from enum import Enum, auto
> +from typing import Dict
>
> from .config import (
> OS,
> @@ -67,12 +68,13 @@ class Statistics(dict):
> Using a dict provides a convenient way to format the data.
> """
>
> - def __init__(self, dpdk_version):
> + def __init__(self, output_info: Dict[str, str] | None):
> super(Statistics, self).__init__()
> for result in Result:
> self[result.name] = 0
> self["PASS RATE"] = 0.0
> - self["DPDK VERSION"] = dpdk_version
> + if output_info:
> + for info_key, info_val in output_info.items(): self[info_key] = info_val
>
> def __iadd__(self, other: Result) -> "Statistics":
> """
> @@ -258,6 +260,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
> """
>
> dpdk_version: str | None
> + output: dict | None
> _logger: DTSLOG
> _errors: list[Exception]
> _return_code: ErrorSeverity
> @@ -267,6 +270,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
> def __init__(self, logger: DTSLOG):
> super(DTSResult, self).__init__()
> self.dpdk_version = None
> + self.output = None
> self._logger = logger
> self._errors = []
> self._return_code = ErrorSeverity.NO_ERR
> @@ -296,7 +300,10 @@ def process(self) -> None:
> for error in self._errors:
> self._logger.debug(repr(error))
>
> - self._stats_result = Statistics(self.dpdk_version)
> + self._stats_result = Statistics(self.output)
> + #add information gathered from the smoke tests to the statistics
> + # for info_key, info_val in smoke_test_info.items(): self._stats_result[info_key] = info_val
> + # print(self._stats_result)
> self.add_stats(self._stats_result)
> with open(self._stats_filename, "w+") as stats_file:
> stats_file.write(str(self._stats_result))
> diff --git a/dts/framework/test_suite.py b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> index 0705f38f..1518fb8a 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> @@ -10,11 +10,14 @@
> import inspect
> import re
> from types import MethodType
> +from typing import Dict
>
> -from .exception import ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
> +from .config import BuildTargetConfiguration
> +
> +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError, ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
> from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
> from .settings import SETTINGS
> -from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, Result, TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
> +from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, Result, TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
> from .testbed_model import SutNode
>
>
> @@ -37,10 +40,12 @@ class TestSuite(object):
> """
>
> sut_node: SutNode
> + is_blocking = False
> _logger: DTSLOG
> _test_cases_to_run: list[str]
> _func: bool
> _result: TestSuiteResult
> + _dts_result: DTSResult
>
> def __init__(
> self,
> @@ -48,6 +53,8 @@ def __init__(
> test_cases: list[str],
> func: bool,
> build_target_result: BuildTargetResult,
> + build_target_conf: BuildTargetConfiguration,
> + dts_result: DTSResult
> ):
> self.sut_node = sut_node
> self._logger = getLogger(self.__class__.__name__)
> @@ -55,6 +62,8 @@ def __init__(
> self._test_cases_to_run.extend(SETTINGS.test_cases)
> self._func = func
> self._result = build_target_result.add_test_suite(self.__class__.__name__)
> + self.build_target_info = build_target_conf
> + self._dts_result = dts_result
>
> def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
> """
> @@ -118,6 +127,9 @@ def run(self) -> None:
> f"the next test suite may be affected."
> )
> self._result.update_setup(Result.ERROR, e)
> + if len(self._result.get_errors()) > 0 and self.is_blocking:
> + raise BlockingTestSuiteError(test_suite_name)
> +
>
> def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
> """
> @@ -137,6 +149,7 @@ def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
> f"Attempt number {attempt_nr} out of {all_attempts}."
> )
> self._run_test_case(test_case_method, test_case_result)
> +
>
> def _get_functional_test_cases(self) -> list[MethodType]:
> """
> @@ -232,6 +245,11 @@ def _execute_test_case(
> test_case_result.update(Result.SKIP)
> raise KeyboardInterrupt("Stop DTS")
>
> + def write_to_statistics_file(self, output: Dict[str, str]):
> + if self._dts_result.output != None:
> + self._dts_result.output.update(output)
> + else:
> + self._dts_result.output = output
>
> def get_test_suites(testsuite_module_path: str) -> list[type[TestSuite]]:
> def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
> @@ -252,3 +270,5 @@ def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
> test_suite_class
> for _, test_suite_class in inspect.getmembers(testcase_module, is_test_suite)
> ]
> +
> +
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> index f54a9470..63f17cc3 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> @@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
> )
> from .node import Node
> from .sut_node import SutNode
> +
> +from .interactive_apps import (
> + InteractiveScriptHandler,
> + TestpmdDriver
> +)
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..0382d7e0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> +from .interactive_command import (
> + InteractiveScriptHandler
> +)
> +from .testpmd_driver import (
> + TestpmdDriver
> +)
> \ No newline at end of file
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..7467911b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
In general, the file name should match the class name.
> @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
> +# import paramiko
> +from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
> +from framework.settings import SETTINGS
> +
> +class InteractiveScriptHandler:
Once merged with the init functionality and moved to remote_session,
I'd rename it to InteractiveAppSession or something similar.
> +
> + _ssh_client: SSHClient
> + _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
> + _ssh_channel: Channel
> +
> + def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float = SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
> + self._ssh_client = ssh_client
> + self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
> + self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
> + self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
> +
> + def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
> + """
> + Send command to channel without recording output.
> +
> + This method will not verify any input or output, it will
> + simply assume the command succeeded
> + """
> + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> + self._stdin.flush()
> +
> + def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) -> str:
Let's rename expect to prompt. At least for me it was just confusing
in the original DTS.
> + """
> + Send a command and get all output before the expected ending string.
> +
> + **NOTE**
> + Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout buffer so they cannot be
> + used for expect. For example, if you were prompted to log into something
> + with a username and password, you cannot expect "username:" because it wont
> + yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could be consuming an
> + extra newline character to force the current prompt into the stdout buffer.
> +
> + *Return*
> + All output before expected string
> + """
> + stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
> + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> + self._stdin.flush()
> + out:str = ""
> + for line in stdout:
> + out += str(line)
> + if expect in str(line):
> + break
> + stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
> + return out
> +
> + def close(self):
> + self._stdin.close()
> + self._ssh_channel.close()
> +
> + def __del__(self):
> + self.close()
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..1993eae6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
> +
> +from pathlib import PurePath
> +
> +class TestpmdDriver:
This could also be called TestPmdSession. Not sure which is better.
This should extend InteractiveScriptHandler, which should contain
basic functionality common to all apps and then the drivers would
contain app-specific functionality.
> + prompt:str = "testpmd>"
> + interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
> +
> + def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler, dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") -> None:
> + """
> + Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts testpmd
> + """
> + self.interactive_handler = handler
> + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
> + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
> + self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
The paths need to be handled in os-agnostic manner in os_session and
then passed here.
> +
> + def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) -> str:
> + """
> + Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
> +
> + An extra newline character is consumed in order to force the current line into the stdout buffer
> + """
> + return self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command + "\n", expect)
> \ No newline at end of file
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> index d48fafe6..c5147e0e 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ class Node(object):
> lcores: list[LogicalCore]
> _logger: DTSLOG
> _other_sessions: list[OSSession]
> + _execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration
>
> def __init__(self, node_config: NodeConfiguration):
> self.config = node_config
> @@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ def set_up_execution(self, execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
> """
> self._setup_hugepages()
> self._set_up_execution(execution_config)
> + self._execution_config = execution_config
>
> def _set_up_execution(self, execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
> """
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> index 2b2b50d9..8c39a66d 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>
> from .hw import LogicalCoreCount, LogicalCoreList, VirtualDevice
> from .node import Node
> +from .interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
>
>
> class SutNode(Node):
> @@ -261,6 +262,11 @@ def run_dpdk_app(
> return self.main_session.send_command(
> f"{app_path} {eal_args}", timeout, verify=True
> )
> + def create_interactive_session_handler(self) -> InteractiveScriptHandler:
> + """
> + Create a handler for interactive sessions
> + """
> + return InteractiveScriptHandler(self.main_session._interactive_session)
>
>
> class EalParameters(object):
> diff --git a/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..bacf289d
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
> +from framework.test_suite import TestSuite
> +from framework.testbed_model.sut_node import SutNode
> +
> +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import TestpmdDriver
> +
> +def get_compiler_version(compiler_name: str, sut_node: SutNode) -> str:
I don't see a reason why this is outside SmokeTest.
> + match compiler_name:
> + case "gcc":
> + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version", 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
As I alluded to earlier, the call here should be
sut_node.get_compiler_version(). This is to hide implementation
details from test suite developers.
Then, SutNode.get_compiler_version should then call
self.main_session.get_compiler_version(). The reason here is this is
an os-agnostic call.
get_compiler_version() should then be defined in os_session and
implemented in os specific classes.
> + case "clang":
> + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version", 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
> + case "msvc":
> + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"cl", 60).stdout
> + case "icc":
> + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} -V", 60).stdout
> +
> +class SmokeTests(TestSuite):
> + is_blocking = True
> +
> + def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
> + """
> + Setup:
> + build all DPDK
> + """
> + self.dpdk_build_dir_path = self.sut_node.remote_dpdk_build_dir
> +
> +
> + def test_unit_tests(self) -> None:
> + """
> + Test:
> + run the fast-test unit-test suite through meson
> + """
> + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite fast-tests", 300)
Same here, there already are methods that build dpdk. If anything
needs to be added, we should expand those methods.
> +
> + def test_driver_tests(self) -> None:
> + """
> + Test:
> + run the driver-test unit-test suite through meson
> + """
> + list_of_vdevs = ""
> + for dev in self.sut_node._execution_config.vdevs:
> + list_of_vdevs += f"{dev},"
> + print(list_of_vdevs)
> + if len(list_of_vdevs) > 0:
> + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests --test-args \"--vdev {list_of_vdevs}\"", 300)
> + else:
> + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests", 300)
> +
> + def test_gather_info(self) -> None:
> + """
> + Test:
> + gather information about the system and send output to statistics.txt
> + """
> + out = {}
> +
> + out['OS'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"NAME\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60).stdout
> + out["OS VERSION"] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"VERSION\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60, True).stdout
> + out["COMPILER VERSION"] = get_compiler_version(self.build_target_info.compiler.name, self.sut_node)
> + out["DPDK VERSION"] = self.sut_node.dpdk_version
> + if self.build_target_info.os.name == "linux":
> + out['KERNEL VERSION'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -r", 60).stdout
> + elif self.build_target_info.os.name == "windows":
> + out['KERNEL VERSION'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -a", 60).stdout
> + self.write_to_statistics_file(out)
> +
This is not really a test. If we want to add this, it should be stored
elsewhere (in their respective objects, probably in result objects).
Three of these (os, os and kernel versions) are node data, the
remaining two are build target data.
I'm not sure it's a good idea to put these into statistics, as the
statistics are aggregated over all executions and build targets. In
case of multiple SUTs (in different executions) and multiple build
targets we'd record misleading data. We could include data from all
build targets and SUTs though.
The reason we (and original DTS) are storing DPDK version in the
current manner is that that doesn't change across anything, we're
always testing the same tarball.
> +
> +
> + def test_start_testpmd(self) -> None:
> + """
> + Creates and instance of the testpmd driver to run the testpmd app
> + """
> + driver: TestpmdDriver = TestpmdDriver(self.sut_node.create_interactive_session_handler(), self.dpdk_build_dir_path)
The driver should be returned by a method of self.sut_node.
> +
> + print(driver.send_command("show port summary all"))
> +
> + def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
> + """
> + Test:
> + ensure that all drivers listed in the config are bound to the correct drivers
> + """
> + for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
> + for address in nic.addresses:
> + out = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py --status | grep {address}", 60)
This should follow the same abstractions as I outlined above.
However, we don't need to use dpdk-devbind here. It's probably safe to
do so (the script is likely not going to be changed), but we could
> + self.verify(
> + len(out.stdout) != 0,
> + f"Failed to find configured device ({address}) using dpdk-devbind.py",
> + )
> + for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
> + if 'drv=' in string:
> + self.verify(
> + string.split("=")[1] == nic.driver.strip(),
> + f'Driver for device {address} does not match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
> + )
> +
> \ No newline at end of file
> --
> 2.40.1
>
On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 10:05 AM Juraj Linkeš
<juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> wrote:
>
> Hi Jeremy, first, a few general points:
>
One more general point - don't forget to add licenses to all new files
and possibly update licenses in other affected files.
Juraj
I'm sending the second part of the review separately. This is only
about implementation-specific details, the other comments still apply
(such as how I'd like to move/structure the code).
In general, it really looks like we have to go this route. It's kind
of a pexpect-lite approach, which seems fine for this simple use case
(by which I mean the prompt is very well defined and we don't need to
cover exotic corner cases).
> diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> index 8a151221..abca8edc 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> @@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
> from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
> from .ssh_session import SSHSession
>
> +from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
> +from framework.utils import GREEN
>
> def create_remote_session(
> node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> ) -> RemoteSession:
> return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
> +
> +def create_interactive_session(
> + node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> +) -> SSHClient:
> + """
> + Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used for interactive shells
> +
> + This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and may never be utilized
> + """
> + client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
> + client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
> + ip: str = node_config.hostname
> + logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
> + #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
> + port: int = 22
> + if ":" in node_config.hostname:
> + ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
> + port = int(port)
> + client.connect(
> + ip,
> + username=node_config.user,
> + port=port,
> + password=node_config.password or "",
> + timeout=20 if port else 10
> + )
The connect call needs to be in a try/except block where we should
catch the exceptions listed in paramiko docs and convert them into
either SSHConnectionError or SSHTimeoutError. I'd like to make it as
close to what we're doing in
http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230424133537.58698-1-juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech/
as possible.
> + return client
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> index f54a9470..63f17cc3 100644
> --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> @@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
> )
> from .node import Node
> from .sut_node import SutNode
> +
> +from .interactive_apps import (
> + InteractiveScriptHandler,
> + TestpmdDriver
> +)
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..0382d7e0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> +from .interactive_command import (
> + InteractiveScriptHandler
> +)
> +from .testpmd_driver import (
> + TestpmdDriver
> +)
> \ No newline at end of file
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..7467911b
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
> +# import paramiko
> +from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
> +from framework.settings import SETTINGS
> +
> +class InteractiveScriptHandler:
> +
> + _ssh_client: SSHClient
> + _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
> + _ssh_channel: Channel
> +
> + def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float = SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
> + self._ssh_client = ssh_client
> + self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
> + self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
Do we need to open this channel in binary mode? Are there any dpdk
apps which send binary data instead of text?
> + self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
Have you tried using the recv and send methods? Reading the docs, it
looks like using the file-like object approach may be more
straightforward for our case (as the prompt we're expecting is at the
end of a line). What are the differences in practice?
> +
> + def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
> + """
> + Send command to channel without recording output.
> +
> + This method will not verify any input or output, it will
> + simply assume the command succeeded
> + """
> + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> + self._stdin.flush()
I don't see this used anywhere. You mentioned it would be needed for
username/password prompts, but paramiko handles that. Do we need this
for any DPDK app? And even if we do, we should only add it when the
need arises.
> +
> + def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) -> str:
> + """
> + Send a command and get all output before the expected ending string.
> +
> + **NOTE**
The note preface is not needed. We haven't yet 100% agreed on the
docstring format, but in the meantime, let's use the best candidate,
google docs format:
https://google.github.io/styleguide/pyguide.html#38-comments-and-docstrings
> + Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout buffer so they cannot be
> + used for expect.
I'm curious, in the case of testpmd, aren't the lines that contain the
prompt also the ones that expect input? In which case we'd never match
the prompt without the workaround below. Or am I misunderstanding
something?
For example, if you were prompted to log into something
> + with a username and password, you cannot expect "username:" because it wont
> + yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could be consuming an
> + extra newline character to force the current prompt into the stdout buffer.
> +
> + *Return*
> + All output before expected string
> + """
> + stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
Why the different workflow for stdin and stdout?
And where's stderr? I imagine we'd want to capture that as well (to
check errors), or do dpdk apps not emit anything to stderr?
> + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
Let's use an f-string here like everywhere else. There are other
places where this applies as well.
We should also add a logger so that we capture what we send and receive.
> + self._stdin.flush()
> + out:str = ""
> + for line in stdout:
Do we need to worry about different line breaks on different OS's? Or
do dpdk apps always terminate lines with \n?
> + out += str(line)
Do we need the string conversion even if the channel has not been
opened in binary mode? Or is it opened as such by default?
> + if expect in str(line):
The prompt should always be at the end of the line, right? Would
checking the line.endswith(expect) make more sense (or
line.rstrip().endswith(expect))?
> + break
> + stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
The docs say closing only does flushing, so we might as well call
flush so the code is more consistent (we're calling flush on stdin,
not close).
> + return out
> +
> + def close(self):
> + self._stdin.close()
> + self._ssh_channel.close()
> +
> + def __del__(self):
> + self.close()
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..1993eae6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
> +
> +from pathlib import PurePath
> +
> +class TestpmdDriver:
> + prompt:str = "testpmd>"
> + interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
> +
> + def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler, dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") -> None:
> + """
> + Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts testpmd
> + """
> + self.interactive_handler = handler
> + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
> + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
> + self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
> +
> + def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) -> str:
> + """
> + Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
> +
> + An extra newline character is consumed in order to force the current line into the stdout buffer
> + """
> + return self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command + "\n", expect)
The newline is already being added. Or is this the workaround (i.e. we
need two newlines?). If so, move the second newline to
send_command_get_output.
> \ No newline at end of file
> diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
<snip>
> + def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
> + """
> + Test:
> + ensure that all drivers listed in the config are bound to the correct drivers
> + """
> + for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
> + for address in nic.addresses:
> + out = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py --status | grep {address}", 60)
I didn't finish my previous comment, so here's the finish: :-)
This should follow the same abstractions as I outlined above.
However, we don't need to use dpdk-devbind here. It's probably safe to
do so (the script is likely not going to be changed), but we could
interrogate the device the same way the script does:
ls /sys/bus/pci/devices/
And then check that the PCI is listed. Inside the PCI dir, we can
check what driver it's bound to (if any) and basically anything else
we need about the device (but not everything - firmware version comes
to mind).
> + self.verify(
> + len(out.stdout) != 0,
> + f"Failed to find configured device ({address}) using dpdk-devbind.py",
> + )
> + for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
> + if 'drv=' in string:
> + self.verify(
> + string.split("=")[1] == nic.driver.strip(),
> + f'Driver for device {address} does not match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
> + )
> +
On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 4:05 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
wrote:
> Hi Jeremy, first, a few general points:
>
> 1. Send patches to maintainers (Thomas, me, Honnappa, Lijuan and
> anyone else involved with DTS or who might be interested) and add the
> devlist to cc.
>
Thank you for the tip! I'm still new to sending patches and didn't think to
do something like this but I will in the future.
> 2. Run the linter script before submitting.
>
I did forget to run this, I will in the future.
> 3. The use of the various nested objects breaks the current
> abstractions. The basic idea is that the test suite developers should
> ideally only use the sut/tg node objects and those objects should
> delegate logic further to their nested objects. More below.
>
> I have many comments about the implementation, but I haven't run it
> yet. I'm going to do that after this round of comments and I may have
> more ideas.
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 9:28 PM <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> >
> > From: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> >
> > Adds a new test suite for running smoke tests that verify general
> > configuration aspects of the system under test. If any of these tests
> > fail, the DTS execution terminates as part of a "fail-fast" model.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> > ---
> > dts/conf.yaml | 9 ++
> > dts/framework/config/__init__.py | 21 +++++
> > dts/framework/config/conf_yaml_schema.json | 32 ++++++-
> > dts/framework/dts.py | 19 +++-
> > dts/framework/exception.py | 11 +++
> > dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py | 6 +-
> > .../remote_session/remote/__init__.py | 28 ++++++
> > dts/framework/test_result.py | 13 ++-
> > dts/framework/test_suite.py | 24 ++++-
> > dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py | 5 +
> > .../interactive_apps/__init__.py | 6 ++
> > .../interactive_apps/interactive_command.py | 57 +++++++++++
> > .../interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py | 24 +++++
> > dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py | 2 +
> > dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py | 6 ++
> > dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py | 94 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 16 files changed, 348 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
>
> Let's not add any more levels. I don't like even the current hw
> subdirectory (which I want to remove in the docs patch) and we don't
> need it. I'd also like to move this functionality into remote_session,
> as it's handling a type of remote session.
>
I think it makes sense to add a proper wrapper for it, I just didn't create
a subclass for it off of remote_session because the idea behind it was only
allowing users to interact with the session through the
InteractiveScriptHandler/DPDK app handlers. If it were part of the
remote_session class it would have to include operations for sending
commands the way it is written now. I could do this but it seems like a
bigger discussion about whether interactive sessions should create a new
SSH session every time or instead just use one existing session and create
channels off of it.
>
> > create mode 100644 dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> >
> > diff --git a/dts/conf.yaml b/dts/conf.yaml
> > index a9bd8a3e..042ef954 100644
> > --- a/dts/conf.yaml
> > +++ b/dts/conf.yaml
> > @@ -10,13 +10,22 @@ executions:
> > compiler_wrapper: ccache
> > perf: false
> > func: true
> > + nics: #physical devices to be used for testing
> > + - addresses:
> > + - "0000:11:00.0"
> > + - "0000:11:00.1"
> > + driver: "i40e"
> > + vdevs: #names of virtual devices to be used for testing
> > + - "crypto_openssl"
>
> I believe we specified the NICs under SUTs in the original DTS, just
> as Owen did in his internal GitLab patch. If you can access it, have a
> look at how he did it.
> This brings an interesting question of where we want to specify which
> NICs/vdevs to test. It could be on the SUT level, but also on the
> execution or even the build target level. This should be informed by
> testing needs. What makes the most sense? We could specify NIC details
> per SUT/TG and then just reference the NICs on the execution/build
> target level.
>
I put it on the execution level with the thought that you might have
multiple NICs in your SUT but want to separate them into different
executions. I guess in the case of smoke tests, you'd only need to know
them per target because it was talked about previously that then is when we
should run the smoke tests. I think however it would make sense to specify
the NIC you are using for that execution rather than having to assume or
specify elsewhere.
>
> > test_suites:
> > + - smoke_tests
> > - hello_world
> > system_under_test: "SUT 1"
> > nodes:
> > - name: "SUT 1"
> > hostname: sut1.change.me.localhost
> > user: root
> > + password: ""
>
> This was deliberately left out to discourage the use of passwords.
>
> > arch: x86_64
> > os: linux
> > lcores: ""
>
> <snip>
>
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/dts.py b/dts/framework/dts.py
> > index 05022845..0d03e158 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/dts.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/dts.py
> > @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
> >
> > import sys
> >
> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError
> > +
> > from .config import CONFIGURATION, BuildTargetConfiguration,
> ExecutionConfiguration
> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
> > from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, ExecutionResult,
> Result
> > @@ -49,6 +51,7 @@ def run_all() -> None:
> > nodes[sut_node.name] = sut_node
> >
> > if sut_node:
> > + #SMOKE TEST EXECUTION GOES HERE!
> > _run_execution(sut_node, execution, result)
> >
> > except Exception as e:
> > @@ -118,7 +121,7 @@ def _run_build_target(
> >
> > try:
> > sut_node.set_up_build_target(build_target)
> > - result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
> > + # result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
> > build_target_result.update_setup(Result.PASS)
> > except Exception as e:
> > dts_logger.exception("Build target setup failed.")
> > @@ -146,6 +149,7 @@ def _run_suites(
> > with possibly only a subset of test cases.
> > If no subset is specified, run all test cases.
> > """
> > + end_execution = False
>
> This only ends the build target stage, not the execution stage. We
> should either find a better name for the variable or make sure that
> the whole execution is blocked. I think we're aiming for the latter -
> maybe we could just check whether the last exception in result is a
> BlockingTestSuiteError (or better, just call a new method of result
> that will check that), which we could do at multiple stages.
>
Good catch. When writing this and figuring out how to get it to work, I was
thinking about smoke tests on a per build target basis because if it failed
on one build target it could theoretically pass on another, but you'd
likely want your entire execution to fail than have partial results.
>
> > for test_suite_config in execution.test_suites:
> > try:
> > full_suite_path =
> f"tests.TestSuite_{test_suite_config.test_suite}"
> > @@ -160,13 +164,24 @@ def _run_suites(
> >
> > else:
> > for test_suite_class in test_suite_classes:
> > + #HERE NEEDS CHANGING
> > test_suite = test_suite_class(
> > sut_node,
> > test_suite_config.test_cases,
> > execution.func,
> > build_target_result,
> > + sut_node._build_target_config,
> > + result
> > )
> > - test_suite.run()
> > + try:
> > + test_suite.run()
> > + except BlockingTestSuiteError as e:
> > + dts_logger.exception("An error occurred within a
> blocking TestSuite, execution will now end.")
> > + result.add_error(e)
> > + end_execution = True
> > + #if a blocking test failed and we need to bail out of suite
> executions
> > + if end_execution:
> > + break
> >
> >
> > def _exit_dts() -> None:
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/exception.py b/dts/framework/exception.py
> > index ca353d98..4e3f63d1 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/exception.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/exception.py
> > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ class ErrorSeverity(IntEnum):
> > SSH_ERR = 4
> > DPDK_BUILD_ERR = 10
> > TESTCASE_VERIFY_ERR = 20
> > + BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR = 25
> >
> >
> > class DTSError(Exception):
> > @@ -144,3 +145,13 @@ def __init__(self, value: str):
> >
> > def __str__(self) -> str:
> > return repr(self.value)
> > +
> > +class BlockingTestSuiteError(DTSError):
> > + suite_name: str
> > + severity: ClassVar[ErrorSeverity] =
> ErrorSeverity.BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR
> > +
> > + def __init__(self, suite_name:str) -> None:
> > + self.suite_name = suite_name
> > +
> > + def __str__(self) -> str:
> > + return f"Blocking suite {self.suite_name} failed."
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> > index 4c48ae25..22776bc1 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> > @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
> > from framework.testbed_model import LogicalCore
> > from framework.utils import EnvVarsDict, MesonArgs
> >
> > -from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session
> > +from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession,
> create_remote_session, create_interactive_session
> > +
> > +from paramiko import SSHClient
> >
> >
> > class OSSession(ABC):
> > @@ -26,6 +28,7 @@ class OSSession(ABC):
> > name: str
> > _logger: DTSLOG
> > remote_session: RemoteSession
> > + _interactive_session: SSHClient
> >
> > def __init__(
> > self,
> > @@ -37,6 +40,7 @@ def __init__(
> > self.name = name
> > self._logger = logger
> > self.remote_session = create_remote_session(node_config, name,
> logger)
> > + self._interactive_session =
> create_interactive_session(node_config, name, logger)
>
> This session should be stored in SutNode (it should be os-agnostic
> (the apps should behave the same on all os's, right?) and SutNode
> could use it without accessing another object), but created in
> OSSession (this way we make sure any os-specific inputs (such as
> paths) are passed properly).
>
I can move it into SutNode, the main reason I left it there is because I
was essentially thinking of it the same way as the remote session that gets
created once per node. However, I could just as easily have SutNode store
it and call upon OSSession to create one inside its constructor. This would
make creating classes for DPDK apps easier as well once those are
subclasses of the InteractiveScriptHandler.
> >
> > def close(self, force: bool = False) -> None:
> > """
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> > index 8a151221..abca8edc 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> > @@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
> > from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
> > from .ssh_session import SSHSession
> >
> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
> > +from framework.utils import GREEN
> >
> > def create_remote_session(
> > node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> > ) -> RemoteSession:
> > return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
> > +
> > +def create_interactive_session(
> > + node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> > +) -> SSHClient:
> > + """
> > + Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used for
> interactive shells
> > +
> > + This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and may
> never be utilized
> > + """
> > + client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
> > + client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
> > + ip: str = node_config.hostname
> > + logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
>
> Using colors is a remnant from the original DTS. If we want to
> (re-)introduce colors I'd do that in a separate patch in a uniform
> manner.
>
I agree this is likely outside the scope of this patch and the color here
really isn't necessary either so I'll remove it.
>
> > + #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
> > + port: int = 22
>
> This configuration handling should be moved to NodeConfiguration.
> The logic should also be moved to InteractiveScriptHandler. We also
> probably don't need a factory for this.
>
I agree that the configuration could be moved into NodeConfiguration,
however the reason I use a factory and don't have this connect logic inside
InteractiveScriptHandler is because that would mean there would have to be
an SSH session per application. This is one potential solution, but what I
am doing here instead is creating one SSH session for interactive scripts
at the start alongside the usual remote session. This session essentially
exists in the background for the duration of the execution and then each
application for DPDK creates a channel off that session when they are
created. Then, when you are done using the application, it closes the
channel but the session itself stays open.
>
> > + if ":" in node_config.hostname:
> > + ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
> > + port = int(port)
> > + client.connect(
> > + ip,
> > + username=node_config.user,
> > + port=port,
> > + password=node_config.password or "",
> > + timeout=20 if port else 10
> > + )
> > + return client
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_result.py b/dts/framework/test_result.py
> > index 74391982..77202ae2 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/test_result.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_result.py
> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> > import os.path
> > from collections.abc import MutableSequence
> > from enum import Enum, auto
> > +from typing import Dict
> >
> > from .config import (
> > OS,
> > @@ -67,12 +68,13 @@ class Statistics(dict):
> > Using a dict provides a convenient way to format the data.
> > """
> >
> > - def __init__(self, dpdk_version):
> > + def __init__(self, output_info: Dict[str, str] | None):
> > super(Statistics, self).__init__()
> > for result in Result:
> > self[result.name] = 0
> > self["PASS RATE"] = 0.0
> > - self["DPDK VERSION"] = dpdk_version
> > + if output_info:
> > + for info_key, info_val in output_info.items():
> self[info_key] = info_val
> >
> > def __iadd__(self, other: Result) -> "Statistics":
> > """
> > @@ -258,6 +260,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
> > """
> >
> > dpdk_version: str | None
> > + output: dict | None
> > _logger: DTSLOG
> > _errors: list[Exception]
> > _return_code: ErrorSeverity
> > @@ -267,6 +270,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
> > def __init__(self, logger: DTSLOG):
> > super(DTSResult, self).__init__()
> > self.dpdk_version = None
> > + self.output = None
> > self._logger = logger
> > self._errors = []
> > self._return_code = ErrorSeverity.NO_ERR
> > @@ -296,7 +300,10 @@ def process(self) -> None:
> > for error in self._errors:
> > self._logger.debug(repr(error))
> >
> > - self._stats_result = Statistics(self.dpdk_version)
> > + self._stats_result = Statistics(self.output)
> > + #add information gathered from the smoke tests to the statistics
> > + # for info_key, info_val in smoke_test_info.items():
> self._stats_result[info_key] = info_val
> > + # print(self._stats_result)
> > self.add_stats(self._stats_result)
> > with open(self._stats_filename, "w+") as stats_file:
> > stats_file.write(str(self._stats_result))
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_suite.py b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> > index 0705f38f..1518fb8a 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> > @@ -10,11 +10,14 @@
> > import inspect
> > import re
> > from types import MethodType
> > +from typing import Dict
> >
> > -from .exception import ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError,
> TestCaseVerifyError
> > +from .config import BuildTargetConfiguration
> > +
> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError, ConfigurationError,
> SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
> > from .settings import SETTINGS
> > -from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, Result, TestCaseResult,
> TestSuiteResult
> > +from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, Result,
> TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
> > from .testbed_model import SutNode
> >
> >
> > @@ -37,10 +40,12 @@ class TestSuite(object):
> > """
> >
> > sut_node: SutNode
> > + is_blocking = False
> > _logger: DTSLOG
> > _test_cases_to_run: list[str]
> > _func: bool
> > _result: TestSuiteResult
> > + _dts_result: DTSResult
> >
> > def __init__(
> > self,
> > @@ -48,6 +53,8 @@ def __init__(
> > test_cases: list[str],
> > func: bool,
> > build_target_result: BuildTargetResult,
> > + build_target_conf: BuildTargetConfiguration,
> > + dts_result: DTSResult
> > ):
> > self.sut_node = sut_node
> > self._logger = getLogger(self.__class__.__name__)
> > @@ -55,6 +62,8 @@ def __init__(
> > self._test_cases_to_run.extend(SETTINGS.test_cases)
> > self._func = func
> > self._result =
> build_target_result.add_test_suite(self.__class__.__name__)
> > + self.build_target_info = build_target_conf
> > + self._dts_result = dts_result
> >
> > def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
> > """
> > @@ -118,6 +127,9 @@ def run(self) -> None:
> > f"the next test suite may be affected."
> > )
> > self._result.update_setup(Result.ERROR, e)
> > + if len(self._result.get_errors()) > 0 and self.is_blocking:
> > + raise BlockingTestSuiteError(test_suite_name)
> > +
> >
> > def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
> > """
> > @@ -137,6 +149,7 @@ def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
> > f"Attempt number {attempt_nr} out of
> {all_attempts}."
> > )
> > self._run_test_case(test_case_method,
> test_case_result)
> > +
> >
> > def _get_functional_test_cases(self) -> list[MethodType]:
> > """
> > @@ -232,6 +245,11 @@ def _execute_test_case(
> > test_case_result.update(Result.SKIP)
> > raise KeyboardInterrupt("Stop DTS")
> >
> > + def write_to_statistics_file(self, output: Dict[str, str]):
> > + if self._dts_result.output != None:
> > + self._dts_result.output.update(output)
> > + else:
> > + self._dts_result.output = output
> >
> > def get_test_suites(testsuite_module_path: str) ->
> list[type[TestSuite]]:
> > def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
> > @@ -252,3 +270,5 @@ def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
> > test_suite_class
> > for _, test_suite_class in inspect.getmembers(testcase_module,
> is_test_suite)
> > ]
> > +
> > +
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> > index f54a9470..63f17cc3 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> > @@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
> > )
> > from .node import Node
> > from .sut_node import SutNode
> > +
> > +from .interactive_apps import (
> > + InteractiveScriptHandler,
> > + TestpmdDriver
> > +)
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000..0382d7e0
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> > +from .interactive_command import (
> > + InteractiveScriptHandler
> > +)
> > +from .testpmd_driver import (
> > + TestpmdDriver
> > +)
> > \ No newline at end of file
> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000..7467911b
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
>
> In general, the file name should match the class name.
>
> > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
> > +# import paramiko
> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
> > +from framework.settings import SETTINGS
> > +
> > +class InteractiveScriptHandler:
>
> Once merged with the init functionality and moved to remote_session,
> I'd rename it to InteractiveAppSession or something similar.
>
Good point, I'll rename the class and the file.
>
> > +
> > + _ssh_client: SSHClient
> > + _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
> > + _ssh_channel: Channel
> > +
> > + def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float =
> SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
> > + self._ssh_client = ssh_client
> > + self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
> > + self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
> > + self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
> > +
> > + def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Send command to channel without recording output.
> > +
> > + This method will not verify any input or output, it will
> > + simply assume the command succeeded
> > + """
> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> > + self._stdin.flush()
> > +
> > + def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) -> str:
>
> Let's rename expect to prompt. At least for me it was just confusing
> in the original DTS.
>
It definitely can be confusing, I'll change it accordingly as you're right,
prompt is more clear.
>
> > + """
> > + Send a command and get all output before the expected ending
> string.
> > +
> > + **NOTE**
> > + Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout buffer
> so they cannot be
> > + used for expect. For example, if you were prompted to log into
> something
> > + with a username and password, you cannot expect "username:"
> because it wont
> > + yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could be
> consuming an
> > + extra newline character to force the current prompt into the
> stdout buffer.
> > +
> > + *Return*
> > + All output before expected string
> > + """
> > + stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> > + self._stdin.flush()
> > + out:str = ""
> > + for line in stdout:
> > + out += str(line)
> > + if expect in str(line):
> > + break
> > + stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
> > + return out
> > +
> > + def close(self):
> > + self._stdin.close()
> > + self._ssh_channel.close()
> > +
> > + def __del__(self):
> > + self.close()
> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000..1993eae6
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import
> InteractiveScriptHandler
> > +
> > +from pathlib import PurePath
> > +
> > +class TestpmdDriver:
>
> This could also be called TestPmdSession. Not sure which is better.
> This should extend InteractiveScriptHandler, which should contain
> basic functionality common to all apps and then the drivers would
> contain app-specific functionality.
>
Originally the reason I avoided doing this was because I viewed them as
separate layers of the process essentially. I wrote it in a way where the
InteractiveScriptHandler was almost like an interface for any CLI and then
DPDK apps could interact with this interface, but after thinking about it
more, this isn't necessary. There is no reason really that the applications
themselves can't just use these methods directly and it also avoids the
need to have a reference to the handler within the object.
>
> > + prompt:str = "testpmd>"
> > + interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
> > +
> > + def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler,
> dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") ->
> None:
> > + """
> > + Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts testpmd
> > + """
> > + self.interactive_handler = handler
> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd
> /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
> > +
> self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd
> {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
>
> The paths need to be handled in os-agnostic manner in os_session and
> then passed here.
>
> > +
> > + def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) -> str:
> > + """
> > + Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
> > +
> > + An extra newline character is consumed in order to force the
> current line into the stdout buffer
> > + """
> > + return self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command
> + "\n", expect)
> > \ No newline at end of file
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> > index d48fafe6..c5147e0e 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ class Node(object):
> > lcores: list[LogicalCore]
> > _logger: DTSLOG
> > _other_sessions: list[OSSession]
> > + _execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration
> >
> > def __init__(self, node_config: NodeConfiguration):
> > self.config = node_config
> > @@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ def set_up_execution(self, execution_config:
> ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
> > """
> > self._setup_hugepages()
> > self._set_up_execution(execution_config)
> > + self._execution_config = execution_config
> >
> > def _set_up_execution(self, execution_config:
> ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
> > """
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> > index 2b2b50d9..8c39a66d 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >
> > from .hw import LogicalCoreCount, LogicalCoreList, VirtualDevice
> > from .node import Node
> > +from .interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
> >
> >
> > class SutNode(Node):
> > @@ -261,6 +262,11 @@ def run_dpdk_app(
> > return self.main_session.send_command(
> > f"{app_path} {eal_args}", timeout, verify=True
> > )
> > + def create_interactive_session_handler(self) ->
> InteractiveScriptHandler:
> > + """
> > + Create a handler for interactive sessions
> > + """
> > + return
> InteractiveScriptHandler(self.main_session._interactive_session)
> >
> >
> > class EalParameters(object):
> > diff --git a/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000..bacf289d
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> > @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
> > +from framework.test_suite import TestSuite
> > +from framework.testbed_model.sut_node import SutNode
> > +
> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import TestpmdDriver
> > +
> > +def get_compiler_version(compiler_name: str, sut_node: SutNode) -> str:
>
> I don't see a reason why this is outside SmokeTest.
> > + match compiler_name:
> > + case "gcc":
> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version",
> 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
>
> As I alluded to earlier, the call here should be
> sut_node.get_compiler_version(). This is to hide implementation
> details from test suite developers.
> Then, SutNode.get_compiler_version should then call
> self.main_session.get_compiler_version(). The reason here is this is
> an os-agnostic call.
> get_compiler_version() should then be defined in os_session and
> implemented in os specific classes.
>
I originally placed the method outside of smoke tests just so it wouldn't
be run with the rest of the suite but it does make sense to make this and
the other comments os-agnostic.
>
> > + case "clang":
> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version",
> 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
> > + case "msvc":
> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"cl",
> 60).stdout
> > + case "icc":
> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} -V", 60).stdout
> > +
> > +class SmokeTests(TestSuite):
> > + is_blocking = True
> > +
> > + def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Setup:
> > + build all DPDK
> > + """
> > + self.dpdk_build_dir_path = self.sut_node.remote_dpdk_build_dir
> > +
> > +
> > + def test_unit_tests(self) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Test:
> > + run the fast-test unit-test suite through meson
> > + """
> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C
> {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite fast-tests", 300)
>
> Same here, there already are methods that build dpdk. If anything
> needs to be added, we should expand those methods.
>
I don't think this is building DPDK, this is just running fast tests and
ensuring that you are in the correct directory.
>
> > +
> > + def test_driver_tests(self) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Test:
> > + run the driver-test unit-test suite through meson
> > + """
> > + list_of_vdevs = ""
> > + for dev in self.sut_node._execution_config.vdevs:
> > + list_of_vdevs += f"{dev},"
> > + print(list_of_vdevs)
> > + if len(list_of_vdevs) > 0:
> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C
> {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests --test-args \"--vdev
> {list_of_vdevs}\"", 300)
> > + else:
> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C
> {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests", 300)
> > +
> > + def test_gather_info(self) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Test:
> > + gather information about the system and send output to
> statistics.txt
> > + """
> > + out = {}
> > +
> > + out['OS'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F=
> '$1==\"NAME\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60).stdout
> > + out["OS VERSION"] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"VERSION\" {print
> $2}' /etc/os-release", 60, True).stdout
> > + out["COMPILER VERSION"] = get_compiler_version(
> self.build_target_info.compiler.name, self.sut_node)
> > + out["DPDK VERSION"] = self.sut_node.dpdk_version
> > + if self.build_target_info.os.name == "linux":
> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -r", 60).stdout
> > + elif self.build_target_info.os.name == "windows":
> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -a", 60).stdout
> > + self.write_to_statistics_file(out)
> > +
>
> This is not really a test. If we want to add this, it should be stored
> elsewhere (in their respective objects, probably in result objects).
> Three of these (os, os and kernel versions) are node data, the
> remaining two are build target data.
> I'm not sure it's a good idea to put these into statistics, as the
> statistics are aggregated over all executions and build targets. In
> case of multiple SUTs (in different executions) and multiple build
> targets we'd record misleading data. We could include data from all
> build targets and SUTs though.
> The reason we (and original DTS) are storing DPDK version in the
> current manner is that that doesn't change across anything, we're
> always testing the same tarball.
>
You're right that this isn't really testing anything, I had originally
included it here because it was just part of the smoke test outline. It's
definitely out of place though and I can move it out to their respective
classes. I think it might make sense to organize/label data based on the
SUT it comes from, I just thought statistics made the most sense because
you could see the test statistics as well as what it was testing in one
place.
>
> > +
> > +
> > + def test_start_testpmd(self) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Creates and instance of the testpmd driver to run the testpmd
> app
> > + """
> > + driver: TestpmdDriver =
> TestpmdDriver(self.sut_node.create_interactive_session_handler(),
> self.dpdk_build_dir_path)
>
> The driver should be returned by a method of self.sut_node.
>
Does it make more sense to have methods for creating handlers for various
DPDK apps in SutNode? I had assumed it would be cleaner to just make the
classes as needed so that you don't have multiple methods doing something
very similar in SutNode (basically just making a class with a different
name that takes in similar information). I suppose that if you were trying
to have developers only interact with the SutNode class this makes sense.
This is also something that could make good use of having the SSHClient in
the SutNode and I could see how it would be useful.
>
> > +
> > + print(driver.send_command("show port summary all"))
> > +
> > + def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Test:
> > + ensure that all drivers listed in the config are bound to
> the correct drivers
> > + """
> > + for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
> > + for address in nic.addresses:
> > + out =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py
> --status | grep {address}", 60)
>
> This should follow the same abstractions as I outlined above.
> However, we don't need to use dpdk-devbind here. It's probably safe to
> do so (the script is likely not going to be changed), but we could
>
That's a good point about dev-bind, it might be better here to just avoid
the reliance on another script.
>
> > + self.verify(
> > + len(out.stdout) != 0,
> > + f"Failed to find configured device ({address})
> using dpdk-devbind.py",
> > + )
> > + for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
> > + if 'drv=' in string:
> > + self.verify(
> > + string.split("=")[1] == nic.driver.strip(),
> > + f'Driver for device {address} does not
> match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
> > + )
> > +
> > \ No newline at end of file
> > --
> > 2.40.1
> >
>
I'll work on these changes, but I'd like to hear what you think about what
I had mentioned about moving the connect logic to the
InteractiveScriptHandler in the comments above. I had originally written it
to use one session throughout rather than opening and closing SSH
connections for every application but I'd like to hear which you think
would be easier/better if there is a difference.
One more point that doesn't fit elsewhere:
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 10:45 PM Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 4:05 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Jeremy, first, a few general points:
>>
>> 1. Send patches to maintainers (Thomas, me, Honnappa, Lijuan and
>> anyone else involved with DTS or who might be interested) and add the
>> devlist to cc.
>
>
> Thank you for the tip! I'm still new to sending patches and didn't think to do something like this but I will in the future.
>
>>
>> 2. Run the linter script before submitting.
>
>
> I did forget to run this, I will in the future.
>
>>
>> 3. The use of the various nested objects breaks the current
>> abstractions. The basic idea is that the test suite developers should
>> ideally only use the sut/tg node objects and those objects should
>> delegate logic further to their nested objects. More below.
>>
>> I have many comments about the implementation, but I haven't run it
>> yet. I'm going to do that after this round of comments and I may have
>> more ideas.
>>
>> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 9:28 PM <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> > From: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
>> >
>> > Adds a new test suite for running smoke tests that verify general
>> > configuration aspects of the system under test. If any of these tests
>> > fail, the DTS execution terminates as part of a "fail-fast" model.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
>> > ---
>> > dts/conf.yaml | 9 ++
>> > dts/framework/config/__init__.py | 21 +++++
>> > dts/framework/config/conf_yaml_schema.json | 32 ++++++-
>> > dts/framework/dts.py | 19 +++-
>> > dts/framework/exception.py | 11 +++
>> > dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py | 6 +-
>> > .../remote_session/remote/__init__.py | 28 ++++++
>> > dts/framework/test_result.py | 13 ++-
>> > dts/framework/test_suite.py | 24 ++++-
>> > dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py | 5 +
>> > .../interactive_apps/__init__.py | 6 ++
>> > .../interactive_apps/interactive_command.py | 57 +++++++++++
>> > .../interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py | 24 +++++
>> > dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py | 2 +
>> > dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py | 6 ++
>> > dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py | 94 +++++++++++++++++++
>> > 16 files changed, 348 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>> > create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
>> > create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
>> > create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
>>
>> Let's not add any more levels. I don't like even the current hw
>> subdirectory (which I want to remove in the docs patch) and we don't
>> need it. I'd also like to move this functionality into remote_session,
>> as it's handling a type of remote session.
>
>
> I think it makes sense to add a proper wrapper for it, I just didn't create a subclass for it off of remote_session because the idea behind it was only allowing users to interact with the session through the InteractiveScriptHandler/DPDK app handlers. If it were part of the remote_session class it would have to include operations for sending commands the way it is written now. I could do this but it seems like a bigger discussion about whether interactive sessions should create a new SSH session every time or instead just use one existing session and create channels off of it.
>
I wasn't clear, I meant to move the python modules into the
remote_session folder. The subclassing would be there only to have a
common API across these remote sessions (as the
InteractiveScriptHandler is a kind of a remote session). If at all
possible, this should be our aim.
>>
>>
>> > create mode 100644 dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
>> >
>> > diff --git a/dts/conf.yaml b/dts/conf.yaml
>> > index a9bd8a3e..042ef954 100644
>> > --- a/dts/conf.yaml
>> > +++ b/dts/conf.yaml
>> > @@ -10,13 +10,22 @@ executions:
>> > compiler_wrapper: ccache
>> > perf: false
>> > func: true
>> > + nics: #physical devices to be used for testing
>> > + - addresses:
>> > + - "0000:11:00.0"
>> > + - "0000:11:00.1"
>> > + driver: "i40e"
>> > + vdevs: #names of virtual devices to be used for testing
>> > + - "crypto_openssl"
>>
>> I believe we specified the NICs under SUTs in the original DTS, just
>> as Owen did in his internal GitLab patch. If you can access it, have a
>> look at how he did it.
>> This brings an interesting question of where we want to specify which
>> NICs/vdevs to test. It could be on the SUT level, but also on the
>> execution or even the build target level. This should be informed by
>> testing needs. What makes the most sense? We could specify NIC details
>> per SUT/TG and then just reference the NICs on the execution/build
>> target level.
>
>
> I put it on the execution level with the thought that you might have multiple NICs in your SUT but want to separate them into different executions.
This is a good point. Is this something you're interested in in the
lab? We should ask Lijuan what she thinks of this. In general, I like
this, so we should at least think of how to add NIC config
implementation so that we could add this later if we're not adding it
now.
> I guess in the case of smoke tests, you'd only need to know them per target because it was talked about previously that then is when we should run the smoke tests. I think however it would make sense to specify the NIC you are using for that execution rather than having to assume or specify elsewhere.
>
Nothing is set in stone, we don't have to run them per build target.
We could have two smoke test suites, one per execution and one per
build target. I actually like that a lot and we should explore that.
If it's not much extra work, we could just do the split like that.
>>
>>
>> > test_suites:
>> > + - smoke_tests
>> > - hello_world
>> > system_under_test: "SUT 1"
>> > nodes:
>> > - name: "SUT 1"
>> > hostname: sut1.change.me.localhost
>> > user: root
>> > + password: ""
>>
>> This was deliberately left out to discourage the use of passwords.
>>
>> > arch: x86_64
>> > os: linux
>> > lcores: ""
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/dts.py b/dts/framework/dts.py
>> > index 05022845..0d03e158 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/dts.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/dts.py
>> > @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
>> >
>> > import sys
>> >
>> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError
>> > +
>> > from .config import CONFIGURATION, BuildTargetConfiguration, ExecutionConfiguration
>> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
>> > from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, ExecutionResult, Result
>> > @@ -49,6 +51,7 @@ def run_all() -> None:
>> > nodes[sut_node.name] = sut_node
>> >
>> > if sut_node:
>> > + #SMOKE TEST EXECUTION GOES HERE!
>> > _run_execution(sut_node, execution, result)
>> >
>> > except Exception as e:
>> > @@ -118,7 +121,7 @@ def _run_build_target(
>> >
>> > try:
>> > sut_node.set_up_build_target(build_target)
>> > - result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
>> > + # result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
>> > build_target_result.update_setup(Result.PASS)
>> > except Exception as e:
>> > dts_logger.exception("Build target setup failed.")
>> > @@ -146,6 +149,7 @@ def _run_suites(
>> > with possibly only a subset of test cases.
>> > If no subset is specified, run all test cases.
>> > """
>> > + end_execution = False
>>
>> This only ends the build target stage, not the execution stage. We
>> should either find a better name for the variable or make sure that
>> the whole execution is blocked. I think we're aiming for the latter -
>> maybe we could just check whether the last exception in result is a
>> BlockingTestSuiteError (or better, just call a new method of result
>> that will check that), which we could do at multiple stages.
>
>
> Good catch. When writing this and figuring out how to get it to work, I was thinking about smoke tests on a per build target basis because if it failed on one build target it could theoretically pass on another, but you'd likely want your entire execution to fail than have partial results.
>
Well, these will be well defined partial results (and definitely
valuable, imagine one build target passing and one failing, we could
easily compare the two to sometimes quickly identify the failure), so
if there's a possibility that the test would pass on another build
target, we should try to run the build target.
In this case, let's just rename the variable to end_build_target or
something similar.
>>
>>
>> > for test_suite_config in execution.test_suites:
>> > try:
>> > full_suite_path = f"tests.TestSuite_{test_suite_config.test_suite}"
>> > @@ -160,13 +164,24 @@ def _run_suites(
>> >
>> > else:
>> > for test_suite_class in test_suite_classes:
>> > + #HERE NEEDS CHANGING
>> > test_suite = test_suite_class(
>> > sut_node,
>> > test_suite_config.test_cases,
>> > execution.func,
>> > build_target_result,
>> > + sut_node._build_target_config,
>> > + result
>> > )
>> > - test_suite.run()
>> > + try:
>> > + test_suite.run()
>> > + except BlockingTestSuiteError as e:
>> > + dts_logger.exception("An error occurred within a blocking TestSuite, execution will now end.")
>> > + result.add_error(e)
>> > + end_execution = True
>> > + #if a blocking test failed and we need to bail out of suite executions
>> > + if end_execution:
>> > + break
>> >
>> >
>> > def _exit_dts() -> None:
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/exception.py b/dts/framework/exception.py
>> > index ca353d98..4e3f63d1 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/exception.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/exception.py
>> > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ class ErrorSeverity(IntEnum):
>> > SSH_ERR = 4
>> > DPDK_BUILD_ERR = 10
>> > TESTCASE_VERIFY_ERR = 20
>> > + BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR = 25
>> >
>> >
>> > class DTSError(Exception):
>> > @@ -144,3 +145,13 @@ def __init__(self, value: str):
>> >
>> > def __str__(self) -> str:
>> > return repr(self.value)
>> > +
>> > +class BlockingTestSuiteError(DTSError):
>> > + suite_name: str
>> > + severity: ClassVar[ErrorSeverity] = ErrorSeverity.BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR
>> > +
>> > + def __init__(self, suite_name:str) -> None:
>> > + self.suite_name = suite_name
>> > +
>> > + def __str__(self) -> str:
>> > + return f"Blocking suite {self.suite_name} failed."
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
>> > index 4c48ae25..22776bc1 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
>> > @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
>> > from framework.testbed_model import LogicalCore
>> > from framework.utils import EnvVarsDict, MesonArgs
>> >
>> > -from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session
>> > +from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session, create_interactive_session
>> > +
>> > +from paramiko import SSHClient
>> >
>> >
>> > class OSSession(ABC):
>> > @@ -26,6 +28,7 @@ class OSSession(ABC):
>> > name: str
>> > _logger: DTSLOG
>> > remote_session: RemoteSession
>> > + _interactive_session: SSHClient
>> >
>> > def __init__(
>> > self,
>> > @@ -37,6 +40,7 @@ def __init__(
>> > self.name = name
>> > self._logger = logger
>> > self.remote_session = create_remote_session(node_config, name, logger)
>> > + self._interactive_session = create_interactive_session(node_config, name, logger)
>>
>> This session should be stored in SutNode (it should be os-agnostic
>> (the apps should behave the same on all os's, right?) and SutNode
>> could use it without accessing another object), but created in
>> OSSession (this way we make sure any os-specific inputs (such as
>> paths) are passed properly).
>
>
> I can move it into SutNode, the main reason I left it there is because I was essentially thinking of it the same way as the remote session that gets created once per node. However, I could just as easily have SutNode store it and call upon OSSession to create one inside its constructor. This would make creating classes for DPDK apps easier as well once those are subclasses of the InteractiveScriptHandler.
>
I was thinking of this interactive session more like
Node._other_sessions, created only when needed. Now that I think about
it, it's always going to be needed if we use it in smoke tests, so we
might as well create it in OSSession (or its subclasses if needed).
Thinking further, we want to use only the app driver object in test
suites. So the SutNode object should have a method that returns the
object and the rest of the implementation needs to be delegated to the
rest of the objects in the hierarchy to ensure proper remote OS
handling.
>>
>> >
>> > def close(self, force: bool = False) -> None:
>> > """
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
>> > index 8a151221..abca8edc 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
>> > @@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
>> > from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
>> > from .ssh_session import SSHSession
>> >
>> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
>> > +from framework.utils import GREEN
>> >
>> > def create_remote_session(
>> > node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
>> > ) -> RemoteSession:
>> > return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
>> > +
>> > +def create_interactive_session(
>> > + node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
>> > +) -> SSHClient:
>> > + """
>> > + Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used for interactive shells
>> > +
>> > + This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and may never be utilized
>> > + """
>> > + client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
>> > + client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
>> > + ip: str = node_config.hostname
>> > + logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
>>
>> Using colors is a remnant from the original DTS. If we want to
>> (re-)introduce colors I'd do that in a separate patch in a uniform
>> manner.
>
>
> I agree this is likely outside the scope of this patch and the color here really isn't necessary either so I'll remove it.
>
>>
>>
>> > + #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
>> > + port: int = 22
>>
>> This configuration handling should be moved to NodeConfiguration.
>> The logic should also be moved to InteractiveScriptHandler. We also
>> probably don't need a factory for this.
>
>
> I agree that the configuration could be moved into NodeConfiguration, however the reason I use a factory and don't have this connect logic inside InteractiveScriptHandler is because that would mean there would have to be an SSH session per application. This is one potential solution, but what I am doing here instead is creating one SSH session for interactive scripts at the start alongside the usual remote session. This session essentially exists in the background for the duration of the execution and then each application for DPDK creates a channel off that session when they are created. Then, when you are done using the application, it closes the channel but the session itself stays open.
>
Ok, I see. What do you think about this:
Let's then move the session creation into a subclass of RemoteSession.
The session would be stored as a class variable and with that we could
subclass further:
RemoteSession -> new subclass -> InteractiveScriptHandler -> DpdkApp
Everything could be handled from within the DdpdkApp objects, but we'd
need to be careful about cleanup (maybe we'd only need to check that
there are no open channels when closing the session).
Or alternatively, the new subclass could just have a method that
returns DpdkApps. We'd have two different class relations:
RemoteSession -> new subclass and InteractiveScriptHandler -> DpdkApp.
I'd put all of the classes into the remote_session directory.
>>
>>
>> > + if ":" in node_config.hostname:
>> > + ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
>> > + port = int(port)
>> > + client.connect(
>> > + ip,
>> > + username=node_config.user,
>> > + port=port,
>> > + password=node_config.password or "",
>> > + timeout=20 if port else 10
>> > + )
>> > + return client
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_result.py b/dts/framework/test_result.py
>> > index 74391982..77202ae2 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/test_result.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_result.py
>> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>> > import os.path
>> > from collections.abc import MutableSequence
>> > from enum import Enum, auto
>> > +from typing import Dict
>> >
>> > from .config import (
>> > OS,
>> > @@ -67,12 +68,13 @@ class Statistics(dict):
>> > Using a dict provides a convenient way to format the data.
>> > """
>> >
>> > - def __init__(self, dpdk_version):
>> > + def __init__(self, output_info: Dict[str, str] | None):
>> > super(Statistics, self).__init__()
>> > for result in Result:
>> > self[result.name] = 0
>> > self["PASS RATE"] = 0.0
>> > - self["DPDK VERSION"] = dpdk_version
>> > + if output_info:
>> > + for info_key, info_val in output_info.items(): self[info_key] = info_val
>> >
>> > def __iadd__(self, other: Result) -> "Statistics":
>> > """
>> > @@ -258,6 +260,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
>> > """
>> >
>> > dpdk_version: str | None
>> > + output: dict | None
>> > _logger: DTSLOG
>> > _errors: list[Exception]
>> > _return_code: ErrorSeverity
>> > @@ -267,6 +270,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
>> > def __init__(self, logger: DTSLOG):
>> > super(DTSResult, self).__init__()
>> > self.dpdk_version = None
>> > + self.output = None
>> > self._logger = logger
>> > self._errors = []
>> > self._return_code = ErrorSeverity.NO_ERR
>> > @@ -296,7 +300,10 @@ def process(self) -> None:
>> > for error in self._errors:
>> > self._logger.debug(repr(error))
>> >
>> > - self._stats_result = Statistics(self.dpdk_version)
>> > + self._stats_result = Statistics(self.output)
>> > + #add information gathered from the smoke tests to the statistics
>> > + # for info_key, info_val in smoke_test_info.items(): self._stats_result[info_key] = info_val
>> > + # print(self._stats_result)
>> > self.add_stats(self._stats_result)
>> > with open(self._stats_filename, "w+") as stats_file:
>> > stats_file.write(str(self._stats_result))
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_suite.py b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
>> > index 0705f38f..1518fb8a 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/test_suite.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
>> > @@ -10,11 +10,14 @@
>> > import inspect
>> > import re
>> > from types import MethodType
>> > +from typing import Dict
>> >
>> > -from .exception import ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
>> > +from .config import BuildTargetConfiguration
>> > +
>> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError, ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
>> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
>> > from .settings import SETTINGS
>> > -from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, Result, TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
>> > +from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, Result, TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
>> > from .testbed_model import SutNode
>> >
>> >
>> > @@ -37,10 +40,12 @@ class TestSuite(object):
>> > """
>> >
>> > sut_node: SutNode
>> > + is_blocking = False
>> > _logger: DTSLOG
>> > _test_cases_to_run: list[str]
>> > _func: bool
>> > _result: TestSuiteResult
>> > + _dts_result: DTSResult
>> >
>> > def __init__(
>> > self,
>> > @@ -48,6 +53,8 @@ def __init__(
>> > test_cases: list[str],
>> > func: bool,
>> > build_target_result: BuildTargetResult,
>> > + build_target_conf: BuildTargetConfiguration,
>> > + dts_result: DTSResult
>> > ):
>> > self.sut_node = sut_node
>> > self._logger = getLogger(self.__class__.__name__)
>> > @@ -55,6 +62,8 @@ def __init__(
>> > self._test_cases_to_run.extend(SETTINGS.test_cases)
>> > self._func = func
>> > self._result = build_target_result.add_test_suite(self.__class__.__name__)
>> > + self.build_target_info = build_target_conf
>> > + self._dts_result = dts_result
>> >
>> > def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
>> > """
>> > @@ -118,6 +127,9 @@ def run(self) -> None:
>> > f"the next test suite may be affected."
>> > )
>> > self._result.update_setup(Result.ERROR, e)
>> > + if len(self._result.get_errors()) > 0 and self.is_blocking:
>> > + raise BlockingTestSuiteError(test_suite_name)
>> > +
>> >
>> > def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
>> > """
>> > @@ -137,6 +149,7 @@ def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
>> > f"Attempt number {attempt_nr} out of {all_attempts}."
>> > )
>> > self._run_test_case(test_case_method, test_case_result)
>> > +
>> >
>> > def _get_functional_test_cases(self) -> list[MethodType]:
>> > """
>> > @@ -232,6 +245,11 @@ def _execute_test_case(
>> > test_case_result.update(Result.SKIP)
>> > raise KeyboardInterrupt("Stop DTS")
>> >
>> > + def write_to_statistics_file(self, output: Dict[str, str]):
>> > + if self._dts_result.output != None:
>> > + self._dts_result.output.update(output)
>> > + else:
>> > + self._dts_result.output = output
>> >
>> > def get_test_suites(testsuite_module_path: str) -> list[type[TestSuite]]:
>> > def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
>> > @@ -252,3 +270,5 @@ def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
>> > test_suite_class
>> > for _, test_suite_class in inspect.getmembers(testcase_module, is_test_suite)
>> > ]
>> > +
>> > +
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
>> > index f54a9470..63f17cc3 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
>> > @@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
>> > )
>> > from .node import Node
>> > from .sut_node import SutNode
>> > +
>> > +from .interactive_apps import (
>> > + InteractiveScriptHandler,
>> > + TestpmdDriver
>> > +)
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
>> > new file mode 100644
>> > index 00000000..0382d7e0
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
>> > +from .interactive_command import (
>> > + InteractiveScriptHandler
>> > +)
>> > +from .testpmd_driver import (
>> > + TestpmdDriver
>> > +)
>> > \ No newline at end of file
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
>> > new file mode 100644
>> > index 00000000..7467911b
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
>>
>> In general, the file name should match the class name.
>>
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
>> > +# import paramiko
>> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
>> > +from framework.settings import SETTINGS
>> > +
>> > +class InteractiveScriptHandler:
>>
>> Once merged with the init functionality and moved to remote_session,
>> I'd rename it to InteractiveAppSession or something similar.
>
>
> Good point, I'll rename the class and the file.
>
>>
>>
>> > +
>> > + _ssh_client: SSHClient
>> > + _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
>> > + _ssh_channel: Channel
>> > +
>> > + def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float = SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
>> > + self._ssh_client = ssh_client
>> > + self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
>> > + self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
>> > + self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
>> > +
>> > + def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
>> > + """
>> > + Send command to channel without recording output.
>> > +
>> > + This method will not verify any input or output, it will
>> > + simply assume the command succeeded
>> > + """
>> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
>> > + self._stdin.flush()
>> > +
>> > + def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) -> str:
>>
>> Let's rename expect to prompt. At least for me it was just confusing
>> in the original DTS.
>
>
> It definitely can be confusing, I'll change it accordingly as you're right, prompt is more clear.
>
>>
>>
>> > + """
>> > + Send a command and get all output before the expected ending string.
>> > +
>> > + **NOTE**
>> > + Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout buffer so they cannot be
>> > + used for expect. For example, if you were prompted to log into something
>> > + with a username and password, you cannot expect "username:" because it wont
>> > + yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could be consuming an
>> > + extra newline character to force the current prompt into the stdout buffer.
>> > +
>> > + *Return*
>> > + All output before expected string
>> > + """
>> > + stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
>> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
>> > + self._stdin.flush()
>> > + out:str = ""
>> > + for line in stdout:
>> > + out += str(line)
>> > + if expect in str(line):
>> > + break
>> > + stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
>> > + return out
>> > +
>> > + def close(self):
>> > + self._stdin.close()
>> > + self._ssh_channel.close()
>> > +
>> > + def __del__(self):
>> > + self.close()
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
>> > new file mode 100644
>> > index 00000000..1993eae6
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
>> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
>> > +
>> > +from pathlib import PurePath
>> > +
>> > +class TestpmdDriver:
>>
>> This could also be called TestPmdSession. Not sure which is better.
>> This should extend InteractiveScriptHandler, which should contain
>> basic functionality common to all apps and then the drivers would
>> contain app-specific functionality.
>
>
> Originally the reason I avoided doing this was because I viewed them as separate layers of the process essentially. I wrote it in a way where the InteractiveScriptHandler was almost like an interface for any CLI and then DPDK apps could interact with this interface, but after thinking about it more, this isn't necessary. There is no reason really that the applications themselves can't just use these methods directly and it also avoids the need to have a reference to the handler within the object.
>
>>
>>
>> > + prompt:str = "testpmd>"
>> > + interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
>> > +
>> > + def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler, dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") -> None:
>> > + """
>> > + Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts testpmd
>> > + """
>> > + self.interactive_handler = handler
>> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
>> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
>> > + self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
>>
>> The paths need to be handled in os-agnostic manner in os_session and
>> then passed here.
>>
>> > +
>> > + def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) -> str:
>> > + """
>> > + Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
>> > +
>> > + An extra newline character is consumed in order to force the current line into the stdout buffer
>> > + """
>> > + return self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command + "\n", expect)
>> > \ No newline at end of file
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
>> > index d48fafe6..c5147e0e 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
>> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ class Node(object):
>> > lcores: list[LogicalCore]
>> > _logger: DTSLOG
>> > _other_sessions: list[OSSession]
>> > + _execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration
>> >
>> > def __init__(self, node_config: NodeConfiguration):
>> > self.config = node_config
>> > @@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ def set_up_execution(self, execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
>> > """
>> > self._setup_hugepages()
>> > self._set_up_execution(execution_config)
>> > + self._execution_config = execution_config
>> >
>> > def _set_up_execution(self, execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
>> > """
>> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
>> > index 2b2b50d9..8c39a66d 100644
>> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
>> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
>> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>> >
>> > from .hw import LogicalCoreCount, LogicalCoreList, VirtualDevice
>> > from .node import Node
>> > +from .interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
>> >
>> >
>> > class SutNode(Node):
>> > @@ -261,6 +262,11 @@ def run_dpdk_app(
>> > return self.main_session.send_command(
>> > f"{app_path} {eal_args}", timeout, verify=True
>> > )
>> > + def create_interactive_session_handler(self) -> InteractiveScriptHandler:
>> > + """
>> > + Create a handler for interactive sessions
>> > + """
>> > + return InteractiveScriptHandler(self.main_session._interactive_session)
>> >
>> >
>> > class EalParameters(object):
>> > diff --git a/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
>> > new file mode 100644
>> > index 00000000..bacf289d
>> > --- /dev/null
>> > +++ b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
>> > @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
>> > +from framework.test_suite import TestSuite
>> > +from framework.testbed_model.sut_node import SutNode
>> > +
>> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import TestpmdDriver
>> > +
>> > +def get_compiler_version(compiler_name: str, sut_node: SutNode) -> str:
>>
>> I don't see a reason why this is outside SmokeTest.
>>
>>
>> > + match compiler_name:
>> > + case "gcc":
>> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version", 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
>>
>> As I alluded to earlier, the call here should be
>> sut_node.get_compiler_version(). This is to hide implementation
>> details from test suite developers.
>> Then, SutNode.get_compiler_version should then call
>> self.main_session.get_compiler_version(). The reason here is this is
>> an os-agnostic call.
>> get_compiler_version() should then be defined in os_session and
>> implemented in os specific classes.
>
>
> I originally placed the method outside of smoke tests just so it wouldn't be run with the rest of the suite but it does make sense to make this and the other comments os-agnostic.
>
>>
>>
>> > + case "clang":
>> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version", 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
>> > + case "msvc":
>> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"cl", 60).stdout
>> > + case "icc":
>> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} -V", 60).stdout
>> > +
>> > +class SmokeTests(TestSuite):
>> > + is_blocking = True
>> > +
>> > + def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
>> > + """
>> > + Setup:
>> > + build all DPDK
>> > + """
>> > + self.dpdk_build_dir_path = self.sut_node.remote_dpdk_build_dir
>> > +
>> > +
>> > + def test_unit_tests(self) -> None:
>> > + """
>> > + Test:
>> > + run the fast-test unit-test suite through meson
>> > + """
>> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite fast-tests", 300)
>>
>> Same here, there already are methods that build dpdk. If anything
>> needs to be added, we should expand those methods.
>
>
> I don't think this is building DPDK, this is just running fast tests and ensuring that you are in the correct directory.
>
Ah, right. These would be probably used only in smoke tests, so it's
probably fine to leave them here. Maybe we could add a method to the
suite? I'm thinking it would make the code a bit more readable.
>>
>>
>> > +
>> > + def test_driver_tests(self) -> None:
>> > + """
>> > + Test:
>> > + run the driver-test unit-test suite through meson
>> > + """
>> > + list_of_vdevs = ""
>> > + for dev in self.sut_node._execution_config.vdevs:
>> > + list_of_vdevs += f"{dev},"
>> > + print(list_of_vdevs)
>> > + if len(list_of_vdevs) > 0:
>> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests --test-args \"--vdev {list_of_vdevs}\"", 300)
>> > + else:
>> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests", 300)
>> > +
>> > + def test_gather_info(self) -> None:
>> > + """
>> > + Test:
>> > + gather information about the system and send output to statistics.txt
>> > + """
>> > + out = {}
>> > +
>> > + out['OS'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"NAME\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60).stdout
>> > + out["OS VERSION"] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"VERSION\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60, True).stdout
>> > + out["COMPILER VERSION"] = get_compiler_version(self.build_target_info.compiler.name, self.sut_node)
>> > + out["DPDK VERSION"] = self.sut_node.dpdk_version
>> > + if self.build_target_info.os.name == "linux":
>> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -r", 60).stdout
>> > + elif self.build_target_info.os.name == "windows":
>> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -a", 60).stdout
>> > + self.write_to_statistics_file(out)
>> > +
>>
>> This is not really a test. If we want to add this, it should be stored
>> elsewhere (in their respective objects, probably in result objects).
>> Three of these (os, os and kernel versions) are node data, the
>> remaining two are build target data.
>> I'm not sure it's a good idea to put these into statistics, as the
>> statistics are aggregated over all executions and build targets. In
>> case of multiple SUTs (in different executions) and multiple build
>> targets we'd record misleading data. We could include data from all
>> build targets and SUTs though.
>> The reason we (and original DTS) are storing DPDK version in the
>> current manner is that that doesn't change across anything, we're
>> always testing the same tarball.
>
>
> You're right that this isn't really testing anything, I had originally included it here because it was just part of the smoke test outline. It's definitely out of place though and I can move it out to their respective classes. I think it might make sense to organize/label data based on the SUT it comes from, I just thought statistics made the most sense because you could see the test statistics as well as what it was testing in one place.
>
We could put anything we want into statistics (it's not a good idea
now, but if we change the format of statistics it'd be fine, but I
think changing the format is out of the scope of this patch) and this
would make sense there, but the first step is properly storing the
data. Moving them to statistics would be trivial then.
>>
>>
>> > +
>> > +
>> > + def test_start_testpmd(self) -> None:
>> > + """
>> > + Creates and instance of the testpmd driver to run the testpmd app
>> > + """
>> > + driver: TestpmdDriver = TestpmdDriver(self.sut_node.create_interactive_session_handler(), self.dpdk_build_dir_path)
>>
>> The driver should be returned by a method of self.sut_node.
>
>
> Does it make more sense to have methods for creating handlers for various DPDK apps in SutNode? I had assumed it would be cleaner to just make the classes as needed so that you don't have multiple methods doing something very similar in SutNode (basically just making a class with a different name that takes in similar information). I suppose that if you were trying to have developers only interact with the SutNode class this makes sense.
>
That's what I meant. The method would return the appropriate app based
on input (which could be an enum) - I think that's preferable to
having a method for each app. We should think about non-interactive
apps here as well (such as the helloworld app that's already in use).
> This is also something that could make good use of having the SSHClient in the SutNode and I could see how it would be useful.
>
>>
>>
>> > +
>> > + print(driver.send_command("show port summary all"))
>> > +
>> > + def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
>> > + """
>> > + Test:
>> > + ensure that all drivers listed in the config are bound to the correct drivers
>> > + """
>> > + for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
>> > + for address in nic.addresses:
>> > + out = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py --status | grep {address}", 60)
>>
>> This should follow the same abstractions as I outlined above.
>> However, we don't need to use dpdk-devbind here. It's probably safe to
>> do so (the script is likely not going to be changed), but we could
>
>
> That's a good point about dev-bind, it might be better here to just avoid the reliance on another script.
>
>>
>>
>> > + self.verify(
>> > + len(out.stdout) != 0,
>> > + f"Failed to find configured device ({address}) using dpdk-devbind.py",
>> > + )
>> > + for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
>> > + if 'drv=' in string:
>> > + self.verify(
>> > + string.split("=")[1] == nic.driver.strip(),
>> > + f'Driver for device {address} does not match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
>> > + )
>> > +
>> > \ No newline at end of file
>> > --
>> > 2.40.1
>> >
>
>
> I'll work on these changes, but I'd like to hear what you think about what I had mentioned about moving the connect logic to the InteractiveScriptHandler in the comments above. I had originally written it to use one session throughout rather than opening and closing SSH connections for every application but I'd like to hear which you think would be easier/better if there is a difference.
Yes, let's do one session with each app having its own channel.
On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 6:03 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
wrote:
> I'm sending the second part of the review separately. This is only
> about implementation-specific details, the other comments still apply
> (such as how I'd like to move/structure the code).
>
> In general, it really looks like we have to go this route. It's kind
> of a pexpect-lite approach, which seems fine for this simple use case
> (by which I mean the prompt is very well defined and we don't need to
> cover exotic corner cases).
>
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> > index 8a151221..abca8edc 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> > @@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
> > from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
> > from .ssh_session import SSHSession
> >
> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
> > +from framework.utils import GREEN
> >
> > def create_remote_session(
> > node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> > ) -> RemoteSession:
> > return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
> > +
> > +def create_interactive_session(
> > + node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> > +) -> SSHClient:
> > + """
> > + Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used for
> interactive shells
> > +
> > + This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and may
> never be utilized
> > + """
> > + client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
> > + client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
> > + ip: str = node_config.hostname
> > + logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
> > + #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
> > + port: int = 22
> > + if ":" in node_config.hostname:
> > + ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
> > + port = int(port)
> > + client.connect(
> > + ip,
> > + username=node_config.user,
> > + port=port,
> > + password=node_config.password or "",
> > + timeout=20 if port else 10
> > + )
>
> The connect call needs to be in a try/except block where we should
> catch the exceptions listed in paramiko docs and convert them into
> either SSHConnectionError or SSHTimeoutError. I'd like to make it as
> close to what we're doing in
>
> http://patches.dpdk.org/project/dpdk/patch/20230424133537.58698-1-juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech/
> as possible.
>
You're right, in my attempts to just figure it out and get everything
working I neglected to think about catching the error here, good catch.
>
> > + return client
>
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> > index f54a9470..63f17cc3 100644
> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> > @@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
> > )
> > from .node import Node
> > from .sut_node import SutNode
> > +
> > +from .interactive_apps import (
> > + InteractiveScriptHandler,
> > + TestpmdDriver
> > +)
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000..0382d7e0
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> > +from .interactive_command import (
> > + InteractiveScriptHandler
> > +)
> > +from .testpmd_driver import (
> > + TestpmdDriver
> > +)
> > \ No newline at end of file
> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000..7467911b
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
> > +# import paramiko
> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
> > +from framework.settings import SETTINGS
> > +
> > +class InteractiveScriptHandler:
> > +
> > + _ssh_client: SSHClient
> > + _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
> > + _ssh_channel: Channel
> > +
> > + def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float =
> SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
> > + self._ssh_client = ssh_client
> > + self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
> > + self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
>
> Do we need to open this channel in binary mode? Are there any dpdk
> apps which send binary data instead of text?
>
It does work without the binary mode as well. I don't think there are any
that necessarily need the binary data so you're right, this could likely be
removed.
>
> > + self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
>
> Have you tried using the recv and send methods? Reading the docs, it
> looks like using the file-like object approach may be more
> straightforward for our case (as the prompt we're expecting is at the
> end of a line). What are the differences in practice?
>
>
I did try using recv instead and I believe both would work in theory. I
ended up choosing to go with the file-like approach because it seemed
simpler while still reaching the same goal. The only difference I could
think of between the two is that with file-like buffers we can stop
receiving output as soon as you hit the expected prompt so you could expect
something in the center of the output rather than the end if you felt the
need to. I believe with recv we would just have to repeatedly accept all
the data in the buffer and then stop if that data had the expected output.
In our case however, this likely wouldn't cause a problem.
> > +
> > + def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Send command to channel without recording output.
> > +
> > + This method will not verify any input or output, it will
> > + simply assume the command succeeded
> > + """
> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> > + self._stdin.flush()
>
> I don't see this used anywhere. You mentioned it would be needed for
> username/password prompts, but paramiko handles that. Do we need this
> for any DPDK app? And even if we do, we should only add it when the
> need arises.
>
The newline in this buffer is treated as just sending the command. The
username/password prompts were just an example I used of something that
would expect input from the user, you're right that this is handled
internally (and maybe I should change my example!). Adding a newline here
is just simulating you pressing enter after writing the command and is used
by the shell to know that you're finished adding input.
>
> > +
> > + def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) -> str:
> > + """
> > + Send a command and get all output before the expected ending
> string.
> > +
> > + **NOTE**
>
> The note preface is not needed. We haven't yet 100% agreed on the
> docstring format, but in the meantime, let's use the best candidate,
> google docs format:
> https://google.github.io/styleguide/pyguide.html#38-comments-and-docstrings
I'll adapt to this format, I was just trying to write something that would
stand out here as that's an important detail.
>
>
> > + Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout buffer
> so they cannot be
> > + used for expect.
>
> I'm curious, in the case of testpmd, aren't the lines that contain the
> prompt also the ones that expect input? In which case we'd never match
> the prompt without the workaround below. Or am I misunderstanding
> something?
>
That is correct, without the workaround that adds an extra newline, the
prompt "testpmd>" wouldn't make it into the buffer at the end of the output.
>
> For example, if you were prompted to log into something
> > + with a username and password, you cannot expect "username:"
> because it wont
> > + yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could be
> consuming an
> > + extra newline character to force the current prompt into the
> stdout buffer.
> > +
> > + *Return*
> > + All output before expected string
> > + """
> > + stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
>
> Why the different workflow for stdin and stdout?
> And where's stderr? I imagine we'd want to capture that as well (to
> check errors), or do dpdk apps not emit anything to stderr?
>
The different workflows for stdin and stdout exist because you can't
actually flush stdout using the flush method. Originally, I wanted to have
them both as buffers that are members of the class but this would mean that
stdout would include all of the output that has been collected since it has
been opened. So, we have to only open stdout when we need to capture output
and close it when we no longer want any output (this also disposes of old
output) whereas stdin is flushed every time you send the input and so it
can be reused.
As for the stderr, I believe most DPDK apps only emit data to stdout, but
this is a good idea to capture. I had thought that it was still picked up
by the output file here but after some more testing this isn't the case so
I'll look into capturing stderr too for detecting errors.
>
> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
>
> Let's use an f-string here like everywhere else. There are other
> places where this applies as well.
> We should also add a logger so that we capture what we send and receive.
>
> > + self._stdin.flush()
> > + out:str = ""
> > + for line in stdout:
>
> Do we need to worry about different line breaks on different OS's? Or
> do dpdk apps always terminate lines with \n?
>
I don't believe we do, I think this is something that is handled by the
next() method of the buffer. It's listed in the paramiko documentation that
this should be handled on newline which I would think should handle
different OS's but this is a good thing to lookout for and ensure does work.
>
> > + out += str(line)
>
> Do we need the string conversion even if the channel has not been
> opened in binary mode? Or is it opened as such by default?
>
Looking back at the documentation, you're right that this isn't necessary
if you aren't reading in byte mode, I'll remove it.
>
> > + if expect in str(line):
>
> The prompt should always be at the end of the line, right? Would
> checking the line.endswith(expect) make more sense (or
> line.rstrip().endswith(expect))?
>
It would be in terms of DPDK apps, but on this level I was thinking it
might make sense to allow users to expect any part of the output, not just
the end of the line. This way it could potentially also be used by a
developer for their own interactive script if needed. This was something I
was writing to be generic enough to be used with anything, not just DPDK
apps, so I thought it would make sense to not enforce the restriction and
allow the expected string to be anywhere in the output. However, I see how
enforcing it at the end of the line could make it more clear and consistent.
>
> > + break
> > + stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
>
> The docs say closing only does flushing, so we might as well call
> flush so the code is more consistent (we're calling flush on stdin,
> not close).
>
Originally, I tried this and made the stdout buffer a member variable,
similar to the stdin buffer, but the flush method only flushes write
buffers. Because stdout is a read buffer, when you call flush() on it the
method doesn't do anything and the old data in the stdout buffer remains. I
tried to find another way to empty the buffer but I didn't find anything
other than closing it and reopening it as needed.
>
> > + return out
> > +
> > + def close(self):
> > + self._stdin.close()
> > + self._ssh_channel.close()
> > +
> > + def __del__(self):
> > + self.close()
> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000..1993eae6
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import
> InteractiveScriptHandler
> > +
> > +from pathlib import PurePath
> > +
> > +class TestpmdDriver:
> > + prompt:str = "testpmd>"
> > + interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
> > +
> > + def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler,
> dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") ->
> None:
> > + """
> > + Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts testpmd
> > + """
> > + self.interactive_handler = handler
> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd
> /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
> > +
> self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd
> {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
> > +
> > + def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) -> str:
> > + """
> > + Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
> > +
> > + An extra newline character is consumed in order to force the
> current line into the stdout buffer
> > + """
> > + return self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command
> + "\n", expect)
>
> The newline is already being added. Or is this the workaround (i.e. we
> need two newlines?). If so, move the second newline to
> send_command_get_output.
>
The newline we are adding here is the workaround which does end up adding
two new lines. The first newline (added in send_command_get_output) is to
actually send the command, the second one (added here) is a specific
workaround that forces an additional newline to be entered. What this does
is it causes the current line after the command finishes (in this case, a
"testpmd>" line that is expecting input) to accept an empty string which
does nothing but add the current line into the output buffer. The reason I
left it in the testpmd specific driver is because this work-around only
works for "bash-like" tools that prompt you with the same line again after
accepting an empty string.
I was trying to keep send_command_get_output generic enough to be used on
any interactive environment, not just DPDK apps or "bash-like" environments
and left this work around in the TestpmdDriver because it seemed more
specific to that tool.
>
> > \ No newline at end of file
> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
>
> <snip>
>
> > + def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
> > + """
> > + Test:
> > + ensure that all drivers listed in the config are bound to
> the correct drivers
> > + """
> > + for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
> > + for address in nic.addresses:
> > + out =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py
> --status | grep {address}", 60)
>
> I didn't finish my previous comment, so here's the finish: :-)
> This should follow the same abstractions as I outlined above.
> However, we don't need to use dpdk-devbind here. It's probably safe to
> do so (the script is likely not going to be changed), but we could
> interrogate the device the same way the script does:
> ls /sys/bus/pci/devices/
>
> And then check that the PCI is listed. Inside the PCI dir, we can
> check what driver it's bound to (if any) and basically anything else
> we need about the device (but not everything - firmware version comes
> to mind).
>
This definitely does need to be os-agnostic, but that's a good point about
removing the reliance on the devbind script and might be a good thing to
implement.
>
> > + self.verify(
> > + len(out.stdout) != 0,
> > + f"Failed to find configured device ({address})
> using dpdk-devbind.py",
> > + )
> > + for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
> > + if 'drv=' in string:
> > + self.verify(
> > + string.split("=")[1] == nic.driver.strip(),
> > + f'Driver for device {address} does not
> match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
> > + )
> > +
>
Hey Juraj,
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 4:33 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
wrote:
> One more point that doesn't fit elsewhere:
>
> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 10:45 PM Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 4:05 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Jeremy, first, a few general points:
> >>
> >> 1. Send patches to maintainers (Thomas, me, Honnappa, Lijuan and
> >> anyone else involved with DTS or who might be interested) and add the
> >> devlist to cc.
> >
> >
> > Thank you for the tip! I'm still new to sending patches and didn't think
> to do something like this but I will in the future.
> >
> >>
> >> 2. Run the linter script before submitting.
> >
> >
> > I did forget to run this, I will in the future.
> >
> >>
> >> 3. The use of the various nested objects breaks the current
> >> abstractions. The basic idea is that the test suite developers should
> >> ideally only use the sut/tg node objects and those objects should
> >> delegate logic further to their nested objects. More below.
> >>
> >> I have many comments about the implementation, but I haven't run it
> >> yet. I'm going to do that after this round of comments and I may have
> >> more ideas.
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 9:28 PM <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > From: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> >> >
> >> > Adds a new test suite for running smoke tests that verify general
> >> > configuration aspects of the system under test. If any of these tests
> >> > fail, the DTS execution terminates as part of a "fail-fast" model.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> >> > ---
> >> > dts/conf.yaml | 9 ++
> >> > dts/framework/config/__init__.py | 21 +++++
> >> > dts/framework/config/conf_yaml_schema.json | 32 ++++++-
> >> > dts/framework/dts.py | 19 +++-
> >> > dts/framework/exception.py | 11 +++
> >> > dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py | 6 +-
> >> > .../remote_session/remote/__init__.py | 28 ++++++
> >> > dts/framework/test_result.py | 13 ++-
> >> > dts/framework/test_suite.py | 24 ++++-
> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py | 5 +
> >> > .../interactive_apps/__init__.py | 6 ++
> >> > .../interactive_apps/interactive_command.py | 57 +++++++++++
> >> > .../interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py | 24 +++++
> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py | 2 +
> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py | 6 ++
> >> > dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py | 94
> +++++++++++++++++++
> >> > 16 files changed, 348 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> >> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> >> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> >>
> >> Let's not add any more levels. I don't like even the current hw
> >> subdirectory (which I want to remove in the docs patch) and we don't
> >> need it. I'd also like to move this functionality into remote_session,
> >> as it's handling a type of remote session.
> >
> >
> > I think it makes sense to add a proper wrapper for it, I just didn't
> create a subclass for it off of remote_session because the idea behind it
> was only allowing users to interact with the session through the
> InteractiveScriptHandler/DPDK app handlers. If it were part of the
> remote_session class it would have to include operations for sending
> commands the way it is written now. I could do this but it seems like a
> bigger discussion about whether interactive sessions should create a new
> SSH session every time or instead just use one existing session and create
> channels off of it.
> >
>
> I wasn't clear, I meant to move the python modules into the
> remote_session folder. The subclassing would be there only to have a
> common API across these remote sessions (as the
> InteractiveScriptHandler is a kind of a remote session). If at all
> possible, this should be our aim.
>
I see what you mean now, moving them there shouldn't be a problem.
>
> >>
> >>
> >> > create mode 100644 dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/dts/conf.yaml b/dts/conf.yaml
> >> > index a9bd8a3e..042ef954 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/conf.yaml
> >> > +++ b/dts/conf.yaml
> >> > @@ -10,13 +10,22 @@ executions:
> >> > compiler_wrapper: ccache
> >> > perf: false
> >> > func: true
> >> > + nics: #physical devices to be used for testing
> >> > + - addresses:
> >> > + - "0000:11:00.0"
> >> > + - "0000:11:00.1"
> >> > + driver: "i40e"
> >> > + vdevs: #names of virtual devices to be used for testing
> >> > + - "crypto_openssl"
> >>
> >> I believe we specified the NICs under SUTs in the original DTS, just
> >> as Owen did in his internal GitLab patch. If you can access it, have a
> >> look at how he did it.
> >> This brings an interesting question of where we want to specify which
> >> NICs/vdevs to test. It could be on the SUT level, but also on the
> >> execution or even the build target level. This should be informed by
> >> testing needs. What makes the most sense? We could specify NIC details
> >> per SUT/TG and then just reference the NICs on the execution/build
> >> target level.
> >
> >
> > I put it on the execution level with the thought that you might have
> multiple NICs in your SUT but want to separate them into different
> executions.
>
> This is a good point. Is this something you're interested in in the
> lab? We should ask Lijuan what she thinks of this. In general, I like
> this, so we should at least think of how to add NIC config
> implementation so that we could add this later if we're not adding it
> now.
>
> > I guess in the case of smoke tests, you'd only need to know them per
> target because it was talked about previously that then is when we should
> run the smoke tests. I think however it would make sense to specify the NIC
> you are using for that execution rather than having to assume or specify
> elsewhere.
> >
>
> Nothing is set in stone, we don't have to run them per build target.
> We could have two smoke test suites, one per execution and one per
> build target. I actually like that a lot and we should explore that.
> If it's not much extra work, we could just do the split like that.
>
>
I also like the sound of that. In theory it doesn't seem that hard, if we
made two different suites that tested different things all that needs to
change is when they are run. This would probably take some more planning as
to what we want to run at which points during the run and it might be
easier to get these tests in a better spot first. I do like the idea
though, and agree that it's worth exploring.
>>
> >>
> >> > test_suites:
> >> > + - smoke_tests
> >> > - hello_world
> >> > system_under_test: "SUT 1"
> >> > nodes:
> >> > - name: "SUT 1"
> >> > hostname: sut1.change.me.localhost
> >> > user: root
> >> > + password: ""
> >>
> >> This was deliberately left out to discourage the use of passwords.
> >>
> >> > arch: x86_64
> >> > os: linux
> >> > lcores: ""
> >>
> >> <snip>
> >>
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/dts.py b/dts/framework/dts.py
> >> > index 05022845..0d03e158 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/dts.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/dts.py
> >> > @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
> >> >
> >> > import sys
> >> >
> >> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError
> >> > +
> >> > from .config import CONFIGURATION, BuildTargetConfiguration,
> ExecutionConfiguration
> >> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
> >> > from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult,
> ExecutionResult, Result
> >> > @@ -49,6 +51,7 @@ def run_all() -> None:
> >> > nodes[sut_node.name] = sut_node
> >> >
> >> > if sut_node:
> >> > + #SMOKE TEST EXECUTION GOES HERE!
> >> > _run_execution(sut_node, execution, result)
> >> >
> >> > except Exception as e:
> >> > @@ -118,7 +121,7 @@ def _run_build_target(
> >> >
> >> > try:
> >> > sut_node.set_up_build_target(build_target)
> >> > - result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
> >> > + # result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
> >> > build_target_result.update_setup(Result.PASS)
> >> > except Exception as e:
> >> > dts_logger.exception("Build target setup failed.")
> >> > @@ -146,6 +149,7 @@ def _run_suites(
> >> > with possibly only a subset of test cases.
> >> > If no subset is specified, run all test cases.
> >> > """
> >> > + end_execution = False
> >>
> >> This only ends the build target stage, not the execution stage. We
> >> should either find a better name for the variable or make sure that
> >> the whole execution is blocked. I think we're aiming for the latter -
> >> maybe we could just check whether the last exception in result is a
> >> BlockingTestSuiteError (or better, just call a new method of result
> >> that will check that), which we could do at multiple stages.
> >
> >
> > Good catch. When writing this and figuring out how to get it to work, I
> was thinking about smoke tests on a per build target basis because if it
> failed on one build target it could theoretically pass on another, but
> you'd likely want your entire execution to fail than have partial results.
> >
>
> Well, these will be well defined partial results (and definitely
> valuable, imagine one build target passing and one failing, we could
> easily compare the two to sometimes quickly identify the failure), so
> if there's a possibility that the test would pass on another build
> target, we should try to run the build target.
>
> In this case, let's just rename the variable to end_build_target or
> something similar.
>
>
Alright, will do.
> >>
> >>
> >> > for test_suite_config in execution.test_suites:
> >> > try:
> >> > full_suite_path =
> f"tests.TestSuite_{test_suite_config.test_suite}"
> >> > @@ -160,13 +164,24 @@ def _run_suites(
> >> >
> >> > else:
> >> > for test_suite_class in test_suite_classes:
> >> > + #HERE NEEDS CHANGING
> >> > test_suite = test_suite_class(
> >> > sut_node,
> >> > test_suite_config.test_cases,
> >> > execution.func,
> >> > build_target_result,
> >> > + sut_node._build_target_config,
> >> > + result
> >> > )
> >> > - test_suite.run()
> >> > + try:
> >> > + test_suite.run()
> >> > + except BlockingTestSuiteError as e:
> >> > + dts_logger.exception("An error occurred within a
> blocking TestSuite, execution will now end.")
> >> > + result.add_error(e)
> >> > + end_execution = True
> >> > + #if a blocking test failed and we need to bail out of suite
> executions
> >> > + if end_execution:
> >> > + break
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > def _exit_dts() -> None:
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/exception.py b/dts/framework/exception.py
> >> > index ca353d98..4e3f63d1 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/exception.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/exception.py
> >> > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ class ErrorSeverity(IntEnum):
> >> > SSH_ERR = 4
> >> > DPDK_BUILD_ERR = 10
> >> > TESTCASE_VERIFY_ERR = 20
> >> > + BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR = 25
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > class DTSError(Exception):
> >> > @@ -144,3 +145,13 @@ def __init__(self, value: str):
> >> >
> >> > def __str__(self) -> str:
> >> > return repr(self.value)
> >> > +
> >> > +class BlockingTestSuiteError(DTSError):
> >> > + suite_name: str
> >> > + severity: ClassVar[ErrorSeverity] =
> ErrorSeverity.BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR
> >> > +
> >> > + def __init__(self, suite_name:str) -> None:
> >> > + self.suite_name = suite_name
> >> > +
> >> > + def __str__(self) -> str:
> >> > + return f"Blocking suite {self.suite_name} failed."
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> >> > index 4c48ae25..22776bc1 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> >> > @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
> >> > from framework.testbed_model import LogicalCore
> >> > from framework.utils import EnvVarsDict, MesonArgs
> >> >
> >> > -from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession,
> create_remote_session
> >> > +from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession,
> create_remote_session, create_interactive_session
> >> > +
> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > class OSSession(ABC):
> >> > @@ -26,6 +28,7 @@ class OSSession(ABC):
> >> > name: str
> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
> >> > remote_session: RemoteSession
> >> > + _interactive_session: SSHClient
> >> >
> >> > def __init__(
> >> > self,
> >> > @@ -37,6 +40,7 @@ def __init__(
> >> > self.name = name
> >> > self._logger = logger
> >> > self.remote_session = create_remote_session(node_config,
> name, logger)
> >> > + self._interactive_session =
> create_interactive_session(node_config, name, logger)
> >>
> >> This session should be stored in SutNode (it should be os-agnostic
> >> (the apps should behave the same on all os's, right?) and SutNode
> >> could use it without accessing another object), but created in
> >> OSSession (this way we make sure any os-specific inputs (such as
> >> paths) are passed properly).
> >
> >
> > I can move it into SutNode, the main reason I left it there is because I
> was essentially thinking of it the same way as the remote session that gets
> created once per node. However, I could just as easily have SutNode store
> it and call upon OSSession to create one inside its constructor. This would
> make creating classes for DPDK apps easier as well once those are
> subclasses of the InteractiveScriptHandler.
> >
>
> I was thinking of this interactive session more like
> Node._other_sessions, created only when needed. Now that I think about
> it, it's always going to be needed if we use it in smoke tests, so we
> might as well create it in OSSession (or its subclasses if needed).
>
> Thinking further, we want to use only the app driver object in test
> suites. So the SutNode object should have a method that returns the
> object and the rest of the implementation needs to be delegated to the
> rest of the objects in the hierarchy to ensure proper remote OS
> handling.
>
I like the sound of this. If we use a method and something like an enum
inside of SutNode as well to create these objects then we don't even really
need a method to return this object because it would never be interacted
with directly.
>
> >>
> >> >
> >> > def close(self, force: bool = False) -> None:
> >> > """
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> >> > index 8a151221..abca8edc 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> >> > @@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
> >> > from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
> >> > from .ssh_session import SSHSession
> >> >
> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
> >> > +from framework.utils import GREEN
> >> >
> >> > def create_remote_session(
> >> > node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> >> > ) -> RemoteSession:
> >> > return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
> >> > +
> >> > +def create_interactive_session(
> >> > + node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> >> > +) -> SSHClient:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used for
> interactive shells
> >> > +
> >> > + This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and may
> never be utilized
> >> > + """
> >> > + client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
> >> > + client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
> >> > + ip: str = node_config.hostname
> >> > + logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
> >>
> >> Using colors is a remnant from the original DTS. If we want to
> >> (re-)introduce colors I'd do that in a separate patch in a uniform
> >> manner.
> >
> >
> > I agree this is likely outside the scope of this patch and the color
> here really isn't necessary either so I'll remove it.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > + #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
> >> > + port: int = 22
> >>
> >> This configuration handling should be moved to NodeConfiguration.
> >> The logic should also be moved to InteractiveScriptHandler. We also
> >> probably don't need a factory for this.
> >
> >
> > I agree that the configuration could be moved into NodeConfiguration,
> however the reason I use a factory and don't have this connect logic inside
> InteractiveScriptHandler is because that would mean there would have to be
> an SSH session per application. This is one potential solution, but what I
> am doing here instead is creating one SSH session for interactive scripts
> at the start alongside the usual remote session. This session essentially
> exists in the background for the duration of the execution and then each
> application for DPDK creates a channel off that session when they are
> created. Then, when you are done using the application, it closes the
> channel but the session itself stays open.
> >
>
> Ok, I see. What do you think about this:
> Let's then move the session creation into a subclass of RemoteSession.
> The session would be stored as a class variable and with that we could
> subclass further:
> RemoteSession -> new subclass -> InteractiveScriptHandler -> DpdkApp
>
> Everything could be handled from within the DdpdkApp objects, but we'd
> need to be careful about cleanup (maybe we'd only need to check that
> there are no open channels when closing the session).
>
> Or alternatively, the new subclass could just have a method that
> returns DpdkApps. We'd have two different class relations:
> RemoteSession -> new subclass and InteractiveScriptHandler -> DpdkApp.
>
> I'd put all of the classes into the remote_session directory.
>
>
I like the idea of making a subclass of the remote session and then a
method in the subclass that generates DpdkApps. This way you have a proper
class that maintains the interactive session and InteractiveScriptHandlers
as well as any other DpdkApp can be created and destroyed as needed. The
only reason I wouldn't make InteractiveScriptHandler a subclass of
RemoteSession is because then it would make the InteractiveScriptHandler
something that stored the main SSH session rather than something that just
uses it to make a channel.
Originally, I avoided this because I didn't want to implement the
send_command methods from inside RemoteSession, but a solution to this
could just be creating an InteractiveScriptHandler, sending the command
blindly, and not returning the output. Or maybe there would be some kind of
default prompt I could expect to still collect the output, but I'm not sure
there would be something that is os-agnostic for this. I'm not sure the
best way to show that I don't want people to use the method on the new
subclass that I'm going to create though. I guess one way to handle this
would be just not creating a method that returns this subclass in SutNode.
SutNode could just have a method that returns DPDK apps which should
discourage touching this session directly.
> >>
> >>
> >> > + if ":" in node_config.hostname:
> >> > + ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
> >> > + port = int(port)
> >> > + client.connect(
> >> > + ip,
> >> > + username=node_config.user,
> >> > + port=port,
> >> > + password=node_config.password or "",
> >> > + timeout=20 if port else 10
> >> > + )
> >> > + return client
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_result.py
> b/dts/framework/test_result.py
> >> > index 74391982..77202ae2 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/test_result.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_result.py
> >> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> >> > import os.path
> >> > from collections.abc import MutableSequence
> >> > from enum import Enum, auto
> >> > +from typing import Dict
> >> >
> >> > from .config import (
> >> > OS,
> >> > @@ -67,12 +68,13 @@ class Statistics(dict):
> >> > Using a dict provides a convenient way to format the data.
> >> > """
> >> >
> >> > - def __init__(self, dpdk_version):
> >> > + def __init__(self, output_info: Dict[str, str] | None):
> >> > super(Statistics, self).__init__()
> >> > for result in Result:
> >> > self[result.name] = 0
> >> > self["PASS RATE"] = 0.0
> >> > - self["DPDK VERSION"] = dpdk_version
> >> > + if output_info:
> >> > + for info_key, info_val in output_info.items():
> self[info_key] = info_val
> >> >
> >> > def __iadd__(self, other: Result) -> "Statistics":
> >> > """
> >> > @@ -258,6 +260,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
> >> > """
> >> >
> >> > dpdk_version: str | None
> >> > + output: dict | None
> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
> >> > _errors: list[Exception]
> >> > _return_code: ErrorSeverity
> >> > @@ -267,6 +270,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
> >> > def __init__(self, logger: DTSLOG):
> >> > super(DTSResult, self).__init__()
> >> > self.dpdk_version = None
> >> > + self.output = None
> >> > self._logger = logger
> >> > self._errors = []
> >> > self._return_code = ErrorSeverity.NO_ERR
> >> > @@ -296,7 +300,10 @@ def process(self) -> None:
> >> > for error in self._errors:
> >> > self._logger.debug(repr(error))
> >> >
> >> > - self._stats_result = Statistics(self.dpdk_version)
> >> > + self._stats_result = Statistics(self.output)
> >> > + #add information gathered from the smoke tests to the
> statistics
> >> > + # for info_key, info_val in smoke_test_info.items():
> self._stats_result[info_key] = info_val
> >> > + # print(self._stats_result)
> >> > self.add_stats(self._stats_result)
> >> > with open(self._stats_filename, "w+") as stats_file:
> >> > stats_file.write(str(self._stats_result))
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_suite.py b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> >> > index 0705f38f..1518fb8a 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> >> > @@ -10,11 +10,14 @@
> >> > import inspect
> >> > import re
> >> > from types import MethodType
> >> > +from typing import Dict
> >> >
> >> > -from .exception import ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError,
> TestCaseVerifyError
> >> > +from .config import BuildTargetConfiguration
> >> > +
> >> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError, ConfigurationError,
> SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
> >> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
> >> > from .settings import SETTINGS
> >> > -from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, Result, TestCaseResult,
> TestSuiteResult
> >> > +from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, Result,
> TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
> >> > from .testbed_model import SutNode
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > @@ -37,10 +40,12 @@ class TestSuite(object):
> >> > """
> >> >
> >> > sut_node: SutNode
> >> > + is_blocking = False
> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
> >> > _test_cases_to_run: list[str]
> >> > _func: bool
> >> > _result: TestSuiteResult
> >> > + _dts_result: DTSResult
> >> >
> >> > def __init__(
> >> > self,
> >> > @@ -48,6 +53,8 @@ def __init__(
> >> > test_cases: list[str],
> >> > func: bool,
> >> > build_target_result: BuildTargetResult,
> >> > + build_target_conf: BuildTargetConfiguration,
> >> > + dts_result: DTSResult
> >> > ):
> >> > self.sut_node = sut_node
> >> > self._logger = getLogger(self.__class__.__name__)
> >> > @@ -55,6 +62,8 @@ def __init__(
> >> > self._test_cases_to_run.extend(SETTINGS.test_cases)
> >> > self._func = func
> >> > self._result =
> build_target_result.add_test_suite(self.__class__.__name__)
> >> > + self.build_target_info = build_target_conf
> >> > + self._dts_result = dts_result
> >> >
> >> > def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
> >> > """
> >> > @@ -118,6 +127,9 @@ def run(self) -> None:
> >> > f"the next test suite may be affected."
> >> > )
> >> > self._result.update_setup(Result.ERROR, e)
> >> > + if len(self._result.get_errors()) > 0 and
> self.is_blocking:
> >> > + raise BlockingTestSuiteError(test_suite_name)
> >> > +
> >> >
> >> > def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
> >> > """
> >> > @@ -137,6 +149,7 @@ def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
> >> > f"Attempt number {attempt_nr} out of
> {all_attempts}."
> >> > )
> >> > self._run_test_case(test_case_method,
> test_case_result)
> >> > +
> >> >
> >> > def _get_functional_test_cases(self) -> list[MethodType]:
> >> > """
> >> > @@ -232,6 +245,11 @@ def _execute_test_case(
> >> > test_case_result.update(Result.SKIP)
> >> > raise KeyboardInterrupt("Stop DTS")
> >> >
> >> > + def write_to_statistics_file(self, output: Dict[str, str]):
> >> > + if self._dts_result.output != None:
> >> > + self._dts_result.output.update(output)
> >> > + else:
> >> > + self._dts_result.output = output
> >> >
> >> > def get_test_suites(testsuite_module_path: str) ->
> list[type[TestSuite]]:
> >> > def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
> >> > @@ -252,3 +270,5 @@ def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
> >> > test_suite_class
> >> > for _, test_suite_class in
> inspect.getmembers(testcase_module, is_test_suite)
> >> > ]
> >> > +
> >> > +
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> >> > index f54a9470..63f17cc3 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> >> > @@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
> >> > )
> >> > from .node import Node
> >> > from .sut_node import SutNode
> >> > +
> >> > +from .interactive_apps import (
> >> > + InteractiveScriptHandler,
> >> > + TestpmdDriver
> >> > +)
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 00000000..0382d7e0
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> >> > +from .interactive_command import (
> >> > + InteractiveScriptHandler
> >> > +)
> >> > +from .testpmd_driver import (
> >> > + TestpmdDriver
> >> > +)
> >> > \ No newline at end of file
> >> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 00000000..7467911b
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> >>
> >> In general, the file name should match the class name.
> >>
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
> >> > +# import paramiko
> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
> >> > +from framework.settings import SETTINGS
> >> > +
> >> > +class InteractiveScriptHandler:
> >>
> >> Once merged with the init functionality and moved to remote_session,
> >> I'd rename it to InteractiveAppSession or something similar.
> >
> >
> > Good point, I'll rename the class and the file.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > +
> >> > + _ssh_client: SSHClient
> >> > + _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
> >> > + _ssh_channel: Channel
> >> > +
> >> > + def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float =
> SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
> >> > + self._ssh_client = ssh_client
> >> > + self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
> >> > + self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
> >> > + self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
> >> > +
> >> > + def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Send command to channel without recording output.
> >> > +
> >> > + This method will not verify any input or output, it will
> >> > + simply assume the command succeeded
> >> > + """
> >> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> >> > + self._stdin.flush()
> >> > +
> >> > + def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) ->
> str:
> >>
> >> Let's rename expect to prompt. At least for me it was just confusing
> >> in the original DTS.
> >
> >
> > It definitely can be confusing, I'll change it accordingly as you're
> right, prompt is more clear.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > + """
> >> > + Send a command and get all output before the expected ending
> string.
> >> > +
> >> > + **NOTE**
> >> > + Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout
> buffer so they cannot be
> >> > + used for expect. For example, if you were prompted to log
> into something
> >> > + with a username and password, you cannot expect "username:"
> because it wont
> >> > + yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could be
> consuming an
> >> > + extra newline character to force the current prompt into the
> stdout buffer.
> >> > +
> >> > + *Return*
> >> > + All output before expected string
> >> > + """
> >> > + stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
> >> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> >> > + self._stdin.flush()
> >> > + out:str = ""
> >> > + for line in stdout:
> >> > + out += str(line)
> >> > + if expect in str(line):
> >> > + break
> >> > + stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
> >> > + return out
> >> > +
> >> > + def close(self):
> >> > + self._stdin.close()
> >> > + self._ssh_channel.close()
> >> > +
> >> > + def __del__(self):
> >> > + self.close()
> >> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 00000000..1993eae6
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import
> InteractiveScriptHandler
> >> > +
> >> > +from pathlib import PurePath
> >> > +
> >> > +class TestpmdDriver:
> >>
> >> This could also be called TestPmdSession. Not sure which is better.
> >> This should extend InteractiveScriptHandler, which should contain
> >> basic functionality common to all apps and then the drivers would
> >> contain app-specific functionality.
> >
> >
> > Originally the reason I avoided doing this was because I viewed them as
> separate layers of the process essentially. I wrote it in a way where the
> InteractiveScriptHandler was almost like an interface for any CLI and then
> DPDK apps could interact with this interface, but after thinking about it
> more, this isn't necessary. There is no reason really that the applications
> themselves can't just use these methods directly and it also avoids the
> need to have a reference to the handler within the object.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > + prompt:str = "testpmd>"
> >> > + interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
> >> > +
> >> > + def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler,
> dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") ->
> None:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts testpmd
> >> > + """
> >> > + self.interactive_handler = handler
> >> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
> >> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd
> /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
> >> > +
> self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd
> {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
> >>
> >> The paths need to be handled in os-agnostic manner in os_session and
> >> then passed here.
> >>
> >> > +
> >> > + def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) -> str:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
> >> > +
> >> > + An extra newline character is consumed in order to force the
> current line into the stdout buffer
> >> > + """
> >> > + return
> self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command + "\n", expect)
> >> > \ No newline at end of file
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> >> > index d48fafe6..c5147e0e 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> >> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ class Node(object):
> >> > lcores: list[LogicalCore]
> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
> >> > _other_sessions: list[OSSession]
> >> > + _execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration
> >> >
> >> > def __init__(self, node_config: NodeConfiguration):
> >> > self.config = node_config
> >> > @@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ def set_up_execution(self, execution_config:
> ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
> >> > """
> >> > self._setup_hugepages()
> >> > self._set_up_execution(execution_config)
> >> > + self._execution_config = execution_config
> >> >
> >> > def _set_up_execution(self, execution_config:
> ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
> >> > """
> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> >> > index 2b2b50d9..8c39a66d 100644
> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> >> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >> >
> >> > from .hw import LogicalCoreCount, LogicalCoreList, VirtualDevice
> >> > from .node import Node
> >> > +from .interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > class SutNode(Node):
> >> > @@ -261,6 +262,11 @@ def run_dpdk_app(
> >> > return self.main_session.send_command(
> >> > f"{app_path} {eal_args}", timeout, verify=True
> >> > )
> >> > + def create_interactive_session_handler(self) ->
> InteractiveScriptHandler:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Create a handler for interactive sessions
> >> > + """
> >> > + return
> InteractiveScriptHandler(self.main_session._interactive_session)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > class EalParameters(object):
> >> > diff --git a/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> > index 00000000..bacf289d
> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> > +++ b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
> >> > +from framework.test_suite import TestSuite
> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.sut_node import SutNode
> >> > +
> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import TestpmdDriver
> >> > +
> >> > +def get_compiler_version(compiler_name: str, sut_node: SutNode) ->
> str:
> >>
> >> I don't see a reason why this is outside SmokeTest.
> >>
> >>
> >> > + match compiler_name:
> >> > + case "gcc":
> >> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version",
> 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
> >>
> >> As I alluded to earlier, the call here should be
> >> sut_node.get_compiler_version(). This is to hide implementation
> >> details from test suite developers.
> >> Then, SutNode.get_compiler_version should then call
> >> self.main_session.get_compiler_version(). The reason here is this is
> >> an os-agnostic call.
> >> get_compiler_version() should then be defined in os_session and
> >> implemented in os specific classes.
> >
> >
> > I originally placed the method outside of smoke tests just so it
> wouldn't be run with the rest of the suite but it does make sense to make
> this and the other comments os-agnostic.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > + case "clang":
> >> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version",
> 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
> >> > + case "msvc":
> >> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"cl",
> 60).stdout
> >> > + case "icc":
> >> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} -V", 60).stdout
> >> > +
> >> > +class SmokeTests(TestSuite):
> >> > + is_blocking = True
> >> > +
> >> > + def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Setup:
> >> > + build all DPDK
> >> > + """
> >> > + self.dpdk_build_dir_path =
> self.sut_node.remote_dpdk_build_dir
> >> > +
> >> > +
> >> > + def test_unit_tests(self) -> None:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Test:
> >> > + run the fast-test unit-test suite through meson
> >> > + """
> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C
> {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite fast-tests", 300)
> >>
> >> Same here, there already are methods that build dpdk. If anything
> >> needs to be added, we should expand those methods.
> >
> >
> > I don't think this is building DPDK, this is just running fast tests and
> ensuring that you are in the correct directory.
> >
>
> Ah, right. These would be probably used only in smoke tests, so it's
> probably fine to leave them here. Maybe we could add a method to the
> suite? I'm thinking it would make the code a bit more readable.
>
>
I could look into this.
> >>
> >>
> >> > +
> >> > + def test_driver_tests(self) -> None:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Test:
> >> > + run the driver-test unit-test suite through meson
> >> > + """
> >> > + list_of_vdevs = ""
> >> > + for dev in self.sut_node._execution_config.vdevs:
> >> > + list_of_vdevs += f"{dev},"
> >> > + print(list_of_vdevs)
> >> > + if len(list_of_vdevs) > 0:
> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C
> {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests --test-args \"--vdev
> {list_of_vdevs}\"", 300)
> >> > + else:
> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C
> {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests", 300)
> >> > +
> >> > + def test_gather_info(self) -> None:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Test:
> >> > + gather information about the system and send output to
> statistics.txt
> >> > + """
> >> > + out = {}
> >> > +
> >> > + out['OS'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F=
> '$1==\"NAME\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60).stdout
> >> > + out["OS VERSION"] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"VERSION\" {print
> $2}' /etc/os-release", 60, True).stdout
> >> > + out["COMPILER VERSION"] = get_compiler_version(
> self.build_target_info.compiler.name, self.sut_node)
> >> > + out["DPDK VERSION"] = self.sut_node.dpdk_version
> >> > + if self.build_target_info.os.name == "linux":
> >> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -r", 60).stdout
> >> > + elif self.build_target_info.os.name == "windows":
> >> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -a", 60).stdout
> >> > + self.write_to_statistics_file(out)
> >> > +
> >>
> >> This is not really a test. If we want to add this, it should be stored
> >> elsewhere (in their respective objects, probably in result objects).
> >> Three of these (os, os and kernel versions) are node data, the
> >> remaining two are build target data.
> >> I'm not sure it's a good idea to put these into statistics, as the
> >> statistics are aggregated over all executions and build targets. In
> >> case of multiple SUTs (in different executions) and multiple build
> >> targets we'd record misleading data. We could include data from all
> >> build targets and SUTs though.
> >> The reason we (and original DTS) are storing DPDK version in the
> >> current manner is that that doesn't change across anything, we're
> >> always testing the same tarball.
> >
> >
> > You're right that this isn't really testing anything, I had originally
> included it here because it was just part of the smoke test outline. It's
> definitely out of place though and I can move it out to their respective
> classes. I think it might make sense to organize/label data based on the
> SUT it comes from, I just thought statistics made the most sense because
> you could see the test statistics as well as what it was testing in one
> place.
> >
>
> We could put anything we want into statistics (it's not a good idea
> now, but if we change the format of statistics it'd be fine, but I
> think changing the format is out of the scope of this patch) and this
> would make sense there, but the first step is properly storing the
> data. Moving them to statistics would be trivial then.
>
>
Right, that makes sense.
> >>
> >>
> >> > +
> >> > +
> >> > + def test_start_testpmd(self) -> None:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Creates and instance of the testpmd driver to run the
> testpmd app
> >> > + """
> >> > + driver: TestpmdDriver =
> TestpmdDriver(self.sut_node.create_interactive_session_handler(),
> self.dpdk_build_dir_path)
> >>
> >> The driver should be returned by a method of self.sut_node.
> >
> >
> > Does it make more sense to have methods for creating handlers for
> various DPDK apps in SutNode? I had assumed it would be cleaner to just
> make the classes as needed so that you don't have multiple methods doing
> something very similar in SutNode (basically just making a class with a
> different name that takes in similar information). I suppose that if you
> were trying to have developers only interact with the SutNode class this
> makes sense.
> >
>
> That's what I meant. The method would return the appropriate app based
> on input (which could be an enum) - I think that's preferable to
> having a method for each app. We should think about non-interactive
> apps here as well (such as the helloworld app that's already in use).
>
>
I like this idea for how to handle the creation of the DpdkApps.
> > This is also something that could make good use of having the SSHClient
> in the SutNode and I could see how it would be useful.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > +
> >> > + print(driver.send_command("show port summary all"))
> >> > +
> >> > + def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
> >> > + """
> >> > + Test:
> >> > + ensure that all drivers listed in the config are bound
> to the correct drivers
> >> > + """
> >> > + for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
> >> > + for address in nic.addresses:
> >> > + out =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py
> --status | grep {address}", 60)
> >>
> >> This should follow the same abstractions as I outlined above.
> >> However, we don't need to use dpdk-devbind here. It's probably safe to
> >> do so (the script is likely not going to be changed), but we could
> >
> >
> > That's a good point about dev-bind, it might be better here to just
> avoid the reliance on another script.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > + self.verify(
> >> > + len(out.stdout) != 0,
> >> > + f"Failed to find configured device ({address})
> using dpdk-devbind.py",
> >> > + )
> >> > + for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
> >> > + if 'drv=' in string:
> >> > + self.verify(
> >> > + string.split("=")[1] ==
> nic.driver.strip(),
> >> > + f'Driver for device {address} does not
> match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
> >> > + )
> >> > +
> >> > \ No newline at end of file
> >> > --
> >> > 2.40.1
> >> >
> >
> >
> > I'll work on these changes, but I'd like to hear what you think about
> what I had mentioned about moving the connect logic to the
> InteractiveScriptHandler in the comments above. I had originally written it
> to use one session throughout rather than opening and closing SSH
> connections for every application but I'd like to hear which you think
> would be easier/better if there is a difference.
>
> Yes, let's do one session with each app having its own channel.
>
On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 8:03 PM Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
> Hey Juraj,
>
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 4:33 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> wrote:
>>
>> One more point that doesn't fit elsewhere:
>>
>> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 10:45 PM Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 4:05 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Hi Jeremy, first, a few general points:
>> >>
>> >> 1. Send patches to maintainers (Thomas, me, Honnappa, Lijuan and
>> >> anyone else involved with DTS or who might be interested) and add the
>> >> devlist to cc.
>> >
>> >
>> > Thank you for the tip! I'm still new to sending patches and didn't think to do something like this but I will in the future.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> 2. Run the linter script before submitting.
>> >
>> >
>> > I did forget to run this, I will in the future.
>> >
>> >>
>> >> 3. The use of the various nested objects breaks the current
>> >> abstractions. The basic idea is that the test suite developers should
>> >> ideally only use the sut/tg node objects and those objects should
>> >> delegate logic further to their nested objects. More below.
>> >>
>> >> I have many comments about the implementation, but I haven't run it
>> >> yet. I'm going to do that after this round of comments and I may have
>> >> more ideas.
>> >>
>> >> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 9:28 PM <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > From: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
>> >> >
>> >> > Adds a new test suite for running smoke tests that verify general
>> >> > configuration aspects of the system under test. If any of these tests
>> >> > fail, the DTS execution terminates as part of a "fail-fast" model.
>> >> >
>> >> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
>> >> > ---
>> >> > dts/conf.yaml | 9 ++
>> >> > dts/framework/config/__init__.py | 21 +++++
>> >> > dts/framework/config/conf_yaml_schema.json | 32 ++++++-
>> >> > dts/framework/dts.py | 19 +++-
>> >> > dts/framework/exception.py | 11 +++
>> >> > dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py | 6 +-
>> >> > .../remote_session/remote/__init__.py | 28 ++++++
>> >> > dts/framework/test_result.py | 13 ++-
>> >> > dts/framework/test_suite.py | 24 ++++-
>> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py | 5 +
>> >> > .../interactive_apps/__init__.py | 6 ++
>> >> > .../interactive_apps/interactive_command.py | 57 +++++++++++
>> >> > .../interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py | 24 +++++
>> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py | 2 +
>> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py | 6 ++
>> >> > dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py | 94 +++++++++++++++++++
>> >> > 16 files changed, 348 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>> >> > create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
>> >> > create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
>> >> > create mode 100644 dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
>> >>
>> >> Let's not add any more levels. I don't like even the current hw
>> >> subdirectory (which I want to remove in the docs patch) and we don't
>> >> need it. I'd also like to move this functionality into remote_session,
>> >> as it's handling a type of remote session.
>> >
>> >
>> > I think it makes sense to add a proper wrapper for it, I just didn't create a subclass for it off of remote_session because the idea behind it was only allowing users to interact with the session through the InteractiveScriptHandler/DPDK app handlers. If it were part of the remote_session class it would have to include operations for sending commands the way it is written now. I could do this but it seems like a bigger discussion about whether interactive sessions should create a new SSH session every time or instead just use one existing session and create channels off of it.
>> >
>>
>> I wasn't clear, I meant to move the python modules into the
>> remote_session folder. The subclassing would be there only to have a
>> common API across these remote sessions (as the
>> InteractiveScriptHandler is a kind of a remote session). If at all
>> possible, this should be our aim.
>
>
> I see what you mean now, moving them there shouldn't be a problem.
>
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > create mode 100644 dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
>> >> >
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/conf.yaml b/dts/conf.yaml
>> >> > index a9bd8a3e..042ef954 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/conf.yaml
>> >> > +++ b/dts/conf.yaml
>> >> > @@ -10,13 +10,22 @@ executions:
>> >> > compiler_wrapper: ccache
>> >> > perf: false
>> >> > func: true
>> >> > + nics: #physical devices to be used for testing
>> >> > + - addresses:
>> >> > + - "0000:11:00.0"
>> >> > + - "0000:11:00.1"
>> >> > + driver: "i40e"
>> >> > + vdevs: #names of virtual devices to be used for testing
>> >> > + - "crypto_openssl"
>> >>
>> >> I believe we specified the NICs under SUTs in the original DTS, just
>> >> as Owen did in his internal GitLab patch. If you can access it, have a
>> >> look at how he did it.
>> >> This brings an interesting question of where we want to specify which
>> >> NICs/vdevs to test. It could be on the SUT level, but also on the
>> >> execution or even the build target level. This should be informed by
>> >> testing needs. What makes the most sense? We could specify NIC details
>> >> per SUT/TG and then just reference the NICs on the execution/build
>> >> target level.
>> >
>> >
>> > I put it on the execution level with the thought that you might have multiple NICs in your SUT but want to separate them into different executions.
>>
>> This is a good point. Is this something you're interested in in the
>> lab? We should ask Lijuan what she thinks of this. In general, I like
>> this, so we should at least think of how to add NIC config
>> implementation so that we could add this later if we're not adding it
>> now.
>>
>> > I guess in the case of smoke tests, you'd only need to know them per target because it was talked about previously that then is when we should run the smoke tests. I think however it would make sense to specify the NIC you are using for that execution rather than having to assume or specify elsewhere.
>> >
>>
>> Nothing is set in stone, we don't have to run them per build target.
>> We could have two smoke test suites, one per execution and one per
>> build target. I actually like that a lot and we should explore that.
>> If it's not much extra work, we could just do the split like that.
>>
>
> I also like the sound of that. In theory it doesn't seem that hard, if we made two different suites that tested different things all that needs to change is when they are run. This would probably take some more planning as to what we want to run at which points during the run and it might be easier to get these tests in a better spot first. I do like the idea though, and agree that it's worth exploring.
>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > test_suites:
>> >> > + - smoke_tests
>> >> > - hello_world
>> >> > system_under_test: "SUT 1"
>> >> > nodes:
>> >> > - name: "SUT 1"
>> >> > hostname: sut1.change.me.localhost
>> >> > user: root
>> >> > + password: ""
>> >>
>> >> This was deliberately left out to discourage the use of passwords.
>> >>
>> >> > arch: x86_64
>> >> > os: linux
>> >> > lcores: ""
>> >>
>> >> <snip>
>> >>
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/dts.py b/dts/framework/dts.py
>> >> > index 05022845..0d03e158 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/dts.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/dts.py
>> >> > @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
>> >> >
>> >> > import sys
>> >> >
>> >> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError
>> >> > +
>> >> > from .config import CONFIGURATION, BuildTargetConfiguration, ExecutionConfiguration
>> >> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
>> >> > from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, ExecutionResult, Result
>> >> > @@ -49,6 +51,7 @@ def run_all() -> None:
>> >> > nodes[sut_node.name] = sut_node
>> >> >
>> >> > if sut_node:
>> >> > + #SMOKE TEST EXECUTION GOES HERE!
>> >> > _run_execution(sut_node, execution, result)
>> >> >
>> >> > except Exception as e:
>> >> > @@ -118,7 +121,7 @@ def _run_build_target(
>> >> >
>> >> > try:
>> >> > sut_node.set_up_build_target(build_target)
>> >> > - result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
>> >> > + # result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
>> >> > build_target_result.update_setup(Result.PASS)
>> >> > except Exception as e:
>> >> > dts_logger.exception("Build target setup failed.")
>> >> > @@ -146,6 +149,7 @@ def _run_suites(
>> >> > with possibly only a subset of test cases.
>> >> > If no subset is specified, run all test cases.
>> >> > """
>> >> > + end_execution = False
>> >>
>> >> This only ends the build target stage, not the execution stage. We
>> >> should either find a better name for the variable or make sure that
>> >> the whole execution is blocked. I think we're aiming for the latter -
>> >> maybe we could just check whether the last exception in result is a
>> >> BlockingTestSuiteError (or better, just call a new method of result
>> >> that will check that), which we could do at multiple stages.
>> >
>> >
>> > Good catch. When writing this and figuring out how to get it to work, I was thinking about smoke tests on a per build target basis because if it failed on one build target it could theoretically pass on another, but you'd likely want your entire execution to fail than have partial results.
>> >
>>
>> Well, these will be well defined partial results (and definitely
>> valuable, imagine one build target passing and one failing, we could
>> easily compare the two to sometimes quickly identify the failure), so
>> if there's a possibility that the test would pass on another build
>> target, we should try to run the build target.
>>
>> In this case, let's just rename the variable to end_build_target or
>> something similar.
>>
>
> Alright, will do.
>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > for test_suite_config in execution.test_suites:
>> >> > try:
>> >> > full_suite_path = f"tests.TestSuite_{test_suite_config.test_suite}"
>> >> > @@ -160,13 +164,24 @@ def _run_suites(
>> >> >
>> >> > else:
>> >> > for test_suite_class in test_suite_classes:
>> >> > + #HERE NEEDS CHANGING
>> >> > test_suite = test_suite_class(
>> >> > sut_node,
>> >> > test_suite_config.test_cases,
>> >> > execution.func,
>> >> > build_target_result,
>> >> > + sut_node._build_target_config,
>> >> > + result
>> >> > )
>> >> > - test_suite.run()
>> >> > + try:
>> >> > + test_suite.run()
>> >> > + except BlockingTestSuiteError as e:
>> >> > + dts_logger.exception("An error occurred within a blocking TestSuite, execution will now end.")
>> >> > + result.add_error(e)
>> >> > + end_execution = True
>> >> > + #if a blocking test failed and we need to bail out of suite executions
>> >> > + if end_execution:
>> >> > + break
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > def _exit_dts() -> None:
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/exception.py b/dts/framework/exception.py
>> >> > index ca353d98..4e3f63d1 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/exception.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/exception.py
>> >> > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ class ErrorSeverity(IntEnum):
>> >> > SSH_ERR = 4
>> >> > DPDK_BUILD_ERR = 10
>> >> > TESTCASE_VERIFY_ERR = 20
>> >> > + BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR = 25
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > class DTSError(Exception):
>> >> > @@ -144,3 +145,13 @@ def __init__(self, value: str):
>> >> >
>> >> > def __str__(self) -> str:
>> >> > return repr(self.value)
>> >> > +
>> >> > +class BlockingTestSuiteError(DTSError):
>> >> > + suite_name: str
>> >> > + severity: ClassVar[ErrorSeverity] = ErrorSeverity.BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def __init__(self, suite_name:str) -> None:
>> >> > + self.suite_name = suite_name
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def __str__(self) -> str:
>> >> > + return f"Blocking suite {self.suite_name} failed."
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
>> >> > index 4c48ae25..22776bc1 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
>> >> > @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
>> >> > from framework.testbed_model import LogicalCore
>> >> > from framework.utils import EnvVarsDict, MesonArgs
>> >> >
>> >> > -from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session
>> >> > +from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session, create_interactive_session
>> >> > +
>> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > class OSSession(ABC):
>> >> > @@ -26,6 +28,7 @@ class OSSession(ABC):
>> >> > name: str
>> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
>> >> > remote_session: RemoteSession
>> >> > + _interactive_session: SSHClient
>> >> >
>> >> > def __init__(
>> >> > self,
>> >> > @@ -37,6 +40,7 @@ def __init__(
>> >> > self.name = name
>> >> > self._logger = logger
>> >> > self.remote_session = create_remote_session(node_config, name, logger)
>> >> > + self._interactive_session = create_interactive_session(node_config, name, logger)
>> >>
>> >> This session should be stored in SutNode (it should be os-agnostic
>> >> (the apps should behave the same on all os's, right?) and SutNode
>> >> could use it without accessing another object), but created in
>> >> OSSession (this way we make sure any os-specific inputs (such as
>> >> paths) are passed properly).
>> >
>> >
>> > I can move it into SutNode, the main reason I left it there is because I was essentially thinking of it the same way as the remote session that gets created once per node. However, I could just as easily have SutNode store it and call upon OSSession to create one inside its constructor. This would make creating classes for DPDK apps easier as well once those are subclasses of the InteractiveScriptHandler.
>> >
>>
>> I was thinking of this interactive session more like
>> Node._other_sessions, created only when needed. Now that I think about
>> it, it's always going to be needed if we use it in smoke tests, so we
>> might as well create it in OSSession (or its subclasses if needed).
>>
>> Thinking further, we want to use only the app driver object in test
>> suites. So the SutNode object should have a method that returns the
>> object and the rest of the implementation needs to be delegated to the
>> rest of the objects in the hierarchy to ensure proper remote OS
>> handling.
>
>
> I like the sound of this. If we use a method and something like an enum inside of SutNode as well to create these objects then we don't even really need a method to return this object because it would never be interacted with directly.
>
>>
>>
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > def close(self, force: bool = False) -> None:
>> >> > """
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
>> >> > index 8a151221..abca8edc 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
>> >> > @@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
>> >> > from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
>> >> > from .ssh_session import SSHSession
>> >> >
>> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
>> >> > +from framework.utils import GREEN
>> >> >
>> >> > def create_remote_session(
>> >> > node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
>> >> > ) -> RemoteSession:
>> >> > return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
>> >> > +
>> >> > +def create_interactive_session(
>> >> > + node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
>> >> > +) -> SSHClient:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used for interactive shells
>> >> > +
>> >> > + This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and may never be utilized
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
>> >> > + client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
>> >> > + ip: str = node_config.hostname
>> >> > + logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
>> >>
>> >> Using colors is a remnant from the original DTS. If we want to
>> >> (re-)introduce colors I'd do that in a separate patch in a uniform
>> >> manner.
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree this is likely outside the scope of this patch and the color here really isn't necessary either so I'll remove it.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > + #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
>> >> > + port: int = 22
>> >>
>> >> This configuration handling should be moved to NodeConfiguration.
>> >> The logic should also be moved to InteractiveScriptHandler. We also
>> >> probably don't need a factory for this.
>> >
>> >
>> > I agree that the configuration could be moved into NodeConfiguration, however the reason I use a factory and don't have this connect logic inside InteractiveScriptHandler is because that would mean there would have to be an SSH session per application. This is one potential solution, but what I am doing here instead is creating one SSH session for interactive scripts at the start alongside the usual remote session. This session essentially exists in the background for the duration of the execution and then each application for DPDK creates a channel off that session when they are created. Then, when you are done using the application, it closes the channel but the session itself stays open.
>> >
>>
>> Ok, I see. What do you think about this:
>> Let's then move the session creation into a subclass of RemoteSession.
>> The session would be stored as a class variable and with that we could
>> subclass further:
>> RemoteSession -> new subclass -> InteractiveScriptHandler -> DpdkApp
>>
>> Everything could be handled from within the DdpdkApp objects, but we'd
>> need to be careful about cleanup (maybe we'd only need to check that
>> there are no open channels when closing the session).
>>
>> Or alternatively, the new subclass could just have a method that
>> returns DpdkApps. We'd have two different class relations:
>> RemoteSession -> new subclass and InteractiveScriptHandler -> DpdkApp.
>>
>> I'd put all of the classes into the remote_session directory.
>>
>
> I like the idea of making a subclass of the remote session and then a method in the subclass that generates DpdkApps. This way you have a proper class that maintains the interactive session and InteractiveScriptHandlers as well as any other DpdkApp can be created and destroyed as needed. The only reason I wouldn't make InteractiveScriptHandler a subclass of RemoteSession is because then it would make the InteractiveScriptHandler something that stored the main SSH session rather than something that just uses it to make a channel.
>
> Originally, I avoided this because I didn't want to implement the send_command methods from inside RemoteSession, but a solution to this could just be creating an InteractiveScriptHandler, sending the command blindly, and not returning the output. Or maybe there would be some kind of default prompt I could expect to still collect the output, but I'm not sure there would be something that is os-agnostic for this. I'm not sure the best way to show that I don't want people to use the method on the new subclass that I'm going to create though. I guess one way to handle this would be just not creating a method that returns this subclass in SutNode. SutNode could just have a method that returns DPDK apps which should discourage touching this session directly.
>
Ah right, the fact that the workflow with interactive sessions is a
bit different doesn't make subclassing RemoteSession ideal - the
abstract methods _send_command and copy_file don't make much sense in
the new class.
With that in mind, I think we have two options:
1. Don't use one session with multiple channels. This would make it
more in line with RemoteSession, but the copy_file method still
doesn't make sense, so I prefer 2.
2. Don't subclass RemoteSession as it's a bit too different from what
we need. Just create a new class (named InteractiveRemoteSession
perpahs) that would basically be a factory for drivers (with two parts
- ssh session init and then the creation of driver/app objects). The
InteractiveScriptHandler (I'm thinking of renaming it to
InteractiveShell now) -> DpdkApp would be the other part. I'd put
InteractiveRemoteSession and InteractiveScriptHandler/InteractiveShell
into the same file (those two basically define the API on the user and
developer side).
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > + if ":" in node_config.hostname:
>> >> > + ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
>> >> > + port = int(port)
>> >> > + client.connect(
>> >> > + ip,
>> >> > + username=node_config.user,
>> >> > + port=port,
>> >> > + password=node_config.password or "",
>> >> > + timeout=20 if port else 10
>> >> > + )
>> >> > + return client
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_result.py b/dts/framework/test_result.py
>> >> > index 74391982..77202ae2 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/test_result.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_result.py
>> >> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
>> >> > import os.path
>> >> > from collections.abc import MutableSequence
>> >> > from enum import Enum, auto
>> >> > +from typing import Dict
>> >> >
>> >> > from .config import (
>> >> > OS,
>> >> > @@ -67,12 +68,13 @@ class Statistics(dict):
>> >> > Using a dict provides a convenient way to format the data.
>> >> > """
>> >> >
>> >> > - def __init__(self, dpdk_version):
>> >> > + def __init__(self, output_info: Dict[str, str] | None):
>> >> > super(Statistics, self).__init__()
>> >> > for result in Result:
>> >> > self[result.name] = 0
>> >> > self["PASS RATE"] = 0.0
>> >> > - self["DPDK VERSION"] = dpdk_version
>> >> > + if output_info:
>> >> > + for info_key, info_val in output_info.items(): self[info_key] = info_val
>> >> >
>> >> > def __iadd__(self, other: Result) -> "Statistics":
>> >> > """
>> >> > @@ -258,6 +260,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
>> >> > """
>> >> >
>> >> > dpdk_version: str | None
>> >> > + output: dict | None
>> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
>> >> > _errors: list[Exception]
>> >> > _return_code: ErrorSeverity
>> >> > @@ -267,6 +270,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
>> >> > def __init__(self, logger: DTSLOG):
>> >> > super(DTSResult, self).__init__()
>> >> > self.dpdk_version = None
>> >> > + self.output = None
>> >> > self._logger = logger
>> >> > self._errors = []
>> >> > self._return_code = ErrorSeverity.NO_ERR
>> >> > @@ -296,7 +300,10 @@ def process(self) -> None:
>> >> > for error in self._errors:
>> >> > self._logger.debug(repr(error))
>> >> >
>> >> > - self._stats_result = Statistics(self.dpdk_version)
>> >> > + self._stats_result = Statistics(self.output)
>> >> > + #add information gathered from the smoke tests to the statistics
>> >> > + # for info_key, info_val in smoke_test_info.items(): self._stats_result[info_key] = info_val
>> >> > + # print(self._stats_result)
>> >> > self.add_stats(self._stats_result)
>> >> > with open(self._stats_filename, "w+") as stats_file:
>> >> > stats_file.write(str(self._stats_result))
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_suite.py b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
>> >> > index 0705f38f..1518fb8a 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/test_suite.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
>> >> > @@ -10,11 +10,14 @@
>> >> > import inspect
>> >> > import re
>> >> > from types import MethodType
>> >> > +from typing import Dict
>> >> >
>> >> > -from .exception import ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
>> >> > +from .config import BuildTargetConfiguration
>> >> > +
>> >> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError, ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
>> >> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
>> >> > from .settings import SETTINGS
>> >> > -from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, Result, TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
>> >> > +from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, Result, TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
>> >> > from .testbed_model import SutNode
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > @@ -37,10 +40,12 @@ class TestSuite(object):
>> >> > """
>> >> >
>> >> > sut_node: SutNode
>> >> > + is_blocking = False
>> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
>> >> > _test_cases_to_run: list[str]
>> >> > _func: bool
>> >> > _result: TestSuiteResult
>> >> > + _dts_result: DTSResult
>> >> >
>> >> > def __init__(
>> >> > self,
>> >> > @@ -48,6 +53,8 @@ def __init__(
>> >> > test_cases: list[str],
>> >> > func: bool,
>> >> > build_target_result: BuildTargetResult,
>> >> > + build_target_conf: BuildTargetConfiguration,
>> >> > + dts_result: DTSResult
>> >> > ):
>> >> > self.sut_node = sut_node
>> >> > self._logger = getLogger(self.__class__.__name__)
>> >> > @@ -55,6 +62,8 @@ def __init__(
>> >> > self._test_cases_to_run.extend(SETTINGS.test_cases)
>> >> > self._func = func
>> >> > self._result = build_target_result.add_test_suite(self.__class__.__name__)
>> >> > + self.build_target_info = build_target_conf
>> >> > + self._dts_result = dts_result
>> >> >
>> >> > def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
>> >> > """
>> >> > @@ -118,6 +127,9 @@ def run(self) -> None:
>> >> > f"the next test suite may be affected."
>> >> > )
>> >> > self._result.update_setup(Result.ERROR, e)
>> >> > + if len(self._result.get_errors()) > 0 and self.is_blocking:
>> >> > + raise BlockingTestSuiteError(test_suite_name)
>> >> > +
>> >> >
>> >> > def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
>> >> > """
>> >> > @@ -137,6 +149,7 @@ def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
>> >> > f"Attempt number {attempt_nr} out of {all_attempts}."
>> >> > )
>> >> > self._run_test_case(test_case_method, test_case_result)
>> >> > +
>> >> >
>> >> > def _get_functional_test_cases(self) -> list[MethodType]:
>> >> > """
>> >> > @@ -232,6 +245,11 @@ def _execute_test_case(
>> >> > test_case_result.update(Result.SKIP)
>> >> > raise KeyboardInterrupt("Stop DTS")
>> >> >
>> >> > + def write_to_statistics_file(self, output: Dict[str, str]):
>> >> > + if self._dts_result.output != None:
>> >> > + self._dts_result.output.update(output)
>> >> > + else:
>> >> > + self._dts_result.output = output
>> >> >
>> >> > def get_test_suites(testsuite_module_path: str) -> list[type[TestSuite]]:
>> >> > def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
>> >> > @@ -252,3 +270,5 @@ def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
>> >> > test_suite_class
>> >> > for _, test_suite_class in inspect.getmembers(testcase_module, is_test_suite)
>> >> > ]
>> >> > +
>> >> > +
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
>> >> > index f54a9470..63f17cc3 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
>> >> > @@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
>> >> > )
>> >> > from .node import Node
>> >> > from .sut_node import SutNode
>> >> > +
>> >> > +from .interactive_apps import (
>> >> > + InteractiveScriptHandler,
>> >> > + TestpmdDriver
>> >> > +)
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
>> >> > new file mode 100644
>> >> > index 00000000..0382d7e0
>> >> > --- /dev/null
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
>> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
>> >> > +from .interactive_command import (
>> >> > + InteractiveScriptHandler
>> >> > +)
>> >> > +from .testpmd_driver import (
>> >> > + TestpmdDriver
>> >> > +)
>> >> > \ No newline at end of file
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
>> >> > new file mode 100644
>> >> > index 00000000..7467911b
>> >> > --- /dev/null
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
>> >>
>> >> In general, the file name should match the class name.
>> >>
>> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
>> >> > +# import paramiko
>> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
>> >> > +from framework.settings import SETTINGS
>> >> > +
>> >> > +class InteractiveScriptHandler:
>> >>
>> >> Once merged with the init functionality and moved to remote_session,
>> >> I'd rename it to InteractiveAppSession or something similar.
>> >
>> >
>> > Good point, I'll rename the class and the file.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > +
>> >> > + _ssh_client: SSHClient
>> >> > + _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
>> >> > + _ssh_channel: Channel
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float = SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
>> >> > + self._ssh_client = ssh_client
>> >> > + self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
>> >> > + self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
>> >> > + self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Send command to channel without recording output.
>> >> > +
>> >> > + This method will not verify any input or output, it will
>> >> > + simply assume the command succeeded
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
>> >> > + self._stdin.flush()
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) -> str:
>> >>
>> >> Let's rename expect to prompt. At least for me it was just confusing
>> >> in the original DTS.
>> >
>> >
>> > It definitely can be confusing, I'll change it accordingly as you're right, prompt is more clear.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Send a command and get all output before the expected ending string.
>> >> > +
>> >> > + **NOTE**
>> >> > + Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout buffer so they cannot be
>> >> > + used for expect. For example, if you were prompted to log into something
>> >> > + with a username and password, you cannot expect "username:" because it wont
>> >> > + yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could be consuming an
>> >> > + extra newline character to force the current prompt into the stdout buffer.
>> >> > +
>> >> > + *Return*
>> >> > + All output before expected string
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
>> >> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
>> >> > + self._stdin.flush()
>> >> > + out:str = ""
>> >> > + for line in stdout:
>> >> > + out += str(line)
>> >> > + if expect in str(line):
>> >> > + break
>> >> > + stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
>> >> > + return out
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def close(self):
>> >> > + self._stdin.close()
>> >> > + self._ssh_channel.close()
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def __del__(self):
>> >> > + self.close()
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
>> >> > new file mode 100644
>> >> > index 00000000..1993eae6
>> >> > --- /dev/null
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
>> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
>> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
>> >> > +
>> >> > +from pathlib import PurePath
>> >> > +
>> >> > +class TestpmdDriver:
>> >>
>> >> This could also be called TestPmdSession. Not sure which is better.
>> >> This should extend InteractiveScriptHandler, which should contain
>> >> basic functionality common to all apps and then the drivers would
>> >> contain app-specific functionality.
>> >
>> >
>> > Originally the reason I avoided doing this was because I viewed them as separate layers of the process essentially. I wrote it in a way where the InteractiveScriptHandler was almost like an interface for any CLI and then DPDK apps could interact with this interface, but after thinking about it more, this isn't necessary. There is no reason really that the applications themselves can't just use these methods directly and it also avoids the need to have a reference to the handler within the object.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > + prompt:str = "testpmd>"
>> >> > + interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler, dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") -> None:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts testpmd
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + self.interactive_handler = handler
>> >> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
>> >> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
>> >> > + self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
>> >>
>> >> The paths need to be handled in os-agnostic manner in os_session and
>> >> then passed here.
>> >>
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) -> str:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
>> >> > +
>> >> > + An extra newline character is consumed in order to force the current line into the stdout buffer
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + return self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command + "\n", expect)
>> >> > \ No newline at end of file
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
>> >> > index d48fafe6..c5147e0e 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
>> >> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ class Node(object):
>> >> > lcores: list[LogicalCore]
>> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
>> >> > _other_sessions: list[OSSession]
>> >> > + _execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration
>> >> >
>> >> > def __init__(self, node_config: NodeConfiguration):
>> >> > self.config = node_config
>> >> > @@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ def set_up_execution(self, execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
>> >> > """
>> >> > self._setup_hugepages()
>> >> > self._set_up_execution(execution_config)
>> >> > + self._execution_config = execution_config
>> >> >
>> >> > def _set_up_execution(self, execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
>> >> > """
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
>> >> > index 2b2b50d9..8c39a66d 100644
>> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
>> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
>> >> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
>> >> >
>> >> > from .hw import LogicalCoreCount, LogicalCoreList, VirtualDevice
>> >> > from .node import Node
>> >> > +from .interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > class SutNode(Node):
>> >> > @@ -261,6 +262,11 @@ def run_dpdk_app(
>> >> > return self.main_session.send_command(
>> >> > f"{app_path} {eal_args}", timeout, verify=True
>> >> > )
>> >> > + def create_interactive_session_handler(self) -> InteractiveScriptHandler:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Create a handler for interactive sessions
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + return InteractiveScriptHandler(self.main_session._interactive_session)
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > class EalParameters(object):
>> >> > diff --git a/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
>> >> > new file mode 100644
>> >> > index 00000000..bacf289d
>> >> > --- /dev/null
>> >> > +++ b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
>> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
>> >> > +from framework.test_suite import TestSuite
>> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.sut_node import SutNode
>> >> > +
>> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import TestpmdDriver
>> >> > +
>> >> > +def get_compiler_version(compiler_name: str, sut_node: SutNode) -> str:
>> >>
>> >> I don't see a reason why this is outside SmokeTest.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > + match compiler_name:
>> >> > + case "gcc":
>> >> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version", 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
>> >>
>> >> As I alluded to earlier, the call here should be
>> >> sut_node.get_compiler_version(). This is to hide implementation
>> >> details from test suite developers.
>> >> Then, SutNode.get_compiler_version should then call
>> >> self.main_session.get_compiler_version(). The reason here is this is
>> >> an os-agnostic call.
>> >> get_compiler_version() should then be defined in os_session and
>> >> implemented in os specific classes.
>> >
>> >
>> > I originally placed the method outside of smoke tests just so it wouldn't be run with the rest of the suite but it does make sense to make this and the other comments os-agnostic.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > + case "clang":
>> >> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version", 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
>> >> > + case "msvc":
>> >> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"cl", 60).stdout
>> >> > + case "icc":
>> >> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} -V", 60).stdout
>> >> > +
>> >> > +class SmokeTests(TestSuite):
>> >> > + is_blocking = True
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Setup:
>> >> > + build all DPDK
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + self.dpdk_build_dir_path = self.sut_node.remote_dpdk_build_dir
>> >> > +
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def test_unit_tests(self) -> None:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Test:
>> >> > + run the fast-test unit-test suite through meson
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite fast-tests", 300)
>> >>
>> >> Same here, there already are methods that build dpdk. If anything
>> >> needs to be added, we should expand those methods.
>> >
>> >
>> > I don't think this is building DPDK, this is just running fast tests and ensuring that you are in the correct directory.
>> >
>>
>> Ah, right. These would be probably used only in smoke tests, so it's
>> probably fine to leave them here. Maybe we could add a method to the
>> suite? I'm thinking it would make the code a bit more readable.
>>
>
> I could look into this.
>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def test_driver_tests(self) -> None:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Test:
>> >> > + run the driver-test unit-test suite through meson
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + list_of_vdevs = ""
>> >> > + for dev in self.sut_node._execution_config.vdevs:
>> >> > + list_of_vdevs += f"{dev},"
>> >> > + print(list_of_vdevs)
>> >> > + if len(list_of_vdevs) > 0:
>> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests --test-args \"--vdev {list_of_vdevs}\"", 300)
>> >> > + else:
>> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests", 300)
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def test_gather_info(self) -> None:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Test:
>> >> > + gather information about the system and send output to statistics.txt
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + out = {}
>> >> > +
>> >> > + out['OS'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"NAME\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60).stdout
>> >> > + out["OS VERSION"] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"VERSION\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60, True).stdout
>> >> > + out["COMPILER VERSION"] = get_compiler_version(self.build_target_info.compiler.name, self.sut_node)
>> >> > + out["DPDK VERSION"] = self.sut_node.dpdk_version
>> >> > + if self.build_target_info.os.name == "linux":
>> >> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -r", 60).stdout
>> >> > + elif self.build_target_info.os.name == "windows":
>> >> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -a", 60).stdout
>> >> > + self.write_to_statistics_file(out)
>> >> > +
>> >>
>> >> This is not really a test. If we want to add this, it should be stored
>> >> elsewhere (in their respective objects, probably in result objects).
>> >> Three of these (os, os and kernel versions) are node data, the
>> >> remaining two are build target data.
>> >> I'm not sure it's a good idea to put these into statistics, as the
>> >> statistics are aggregated over all executions and build targets. In
>> >> case of multiple SUTs (in different executions) and multiple build
>> >> targets we'd record misleading data. We could include data from all
>> >> build targets and SUTs though.
>> >> The reason we (and original DTS) are storing DPDK version in the
>> >> current manner is that that doesn't change across anything, we're
>> >> always testing the same tarball.
>> >
>> >
>> > You're right that this isn't really testing anything, I had originally included it here because it was just part of the smoke test outline. It's definitely out of place though and I can move it out to their respective classes. I think it might make sense to organize/label data based on the SUT it comes from, I just thought statistics made the most sense because you could see the test statistics as well as what it was testing in one place.
>> >
>>
>> We could put anything we want into statistics (it's not a good idea
>> now, but if we change the format of statistics it'd be fine, but I
>> think changing the format is out of the scope of this patch) and this
>> would make sense there, but the first step is properly storing the
>> data. Moving them to statistics would be trivial then.
>>
>
> Right, that makes sense.
>
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > +
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def test_start_testpmd(self) -> None:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Creates and instance of the testpmd driver to run the testpmd app
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + driver: TestpmdDriver = TestpmdDriver(self.sut_node.create_interactive_session_handler(), self.dpdk_build_dir_path)
>> >>
>> >> The driver should be returned by a method of self.sut_node.
>> >
>> >
>> > Does it make more sense to have methods for creating handlers for various DPDK apps in SutNode? I had assumed it would be cleaner to just make the classes as needed so that you don't have multiple methods doing something very similar in SutNode (basically just making a class with a different name that takes in similar information). I suppose that if you were trying to have developers only interact with the SutNode class this makes sense.
>> >
>>
>> That's what I meant. The method would return the appropriate app based
>> on input (which could be an enum) - I think that's preferable to
>> having a method for each app. We should think about non-interactive
>> apps here as well (such as the helloworld app that's already in use).
>>
>
> I like this idea for how to handle the creation of the DpdkApps.
>
>>
>> > This is also something that could make good use of having the SSHClient in the SutNode and I could see how it would be useful.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > +
>> >> > + print(driver.send_command("show port summary all"))
>> >> > +
>> >> > + def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + Test:
>> >> > + ensure that all drivers listed in the config are bound to the correct drivers
>> >> > + """
>> >> > + for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
>> >> > + for address in nic.addresses:
>> >> > + out = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py --status | grep {address}", 60)
>> >>
>> >> This should follow the same abstractions as I outlined above.
>> >> However, we don't need to use dpdk-devbind here. It's probably safe to
>> >> do so (the script is likely not going to be changed), but we could
>> >
>> >
>> > That's a good point about dev-bind, it might be better here to just avoid the reliance on another script.
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> > + self.verify(
>> >> > + len(out.stdout) != 0,
>> >> > + f"Failed to find configured device ({address}) using dpdk-devbind.py",
>> >> > + )
>> >> > + for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
>> >> > + if 'drv=' in string:
>> >> > + self.verify(
>> >> > + string.split("=")[1] == nic.driver.strip(),
>> >> > + f'Driver for device {address} does not match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
>> >> > + )
>> >> > +
>> >> > \ No newline at end of file
>> >> > --
>> >> > 2.40.1
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>> > I'll work on these changes, but I'd like to hear what you think about what I had mentioned about moving the connect logic to the InteractiveScriptHandler in the comments above. I had originally written it to use one session throughout rather than opening and closing SSH connections for every application but I'd like to hear which you think would be easier/better if there is a difference.
>>
>> Yes, let's do one session with each app having its own channel.
On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 3:36 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 8:03 PM Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hey Juraj,
> >
> > On Thu, May 25, 2023 at 4:33 AM Juraj Linkeš <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> One more point that doesn't fit elsewhere:
> >>
> >> On Wed, May 24, 2023 at 10:45 PM Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Tue, May 23, 2023 at 4:05 AM Juraj Linkeš
> <juraj.linkes@pantheon.tech> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi Jeremy, first, a few general points:
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. Send patches to maintainers (Thomas, me, Honnappa, Lijuan and
> >> >> anyone else involved with DTS or who might be interested) and add the
> >> >> devlist to cc.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Thank you for the tip! I'm still new to sending patches and didn't
> think to do something like this but I will in the future.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> 2. Run the linter script before submitting.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I did forget to run this, I will in the future.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> 3. The use of the various nested objects breaks the current
> >> >> abstractions. The basic idea is that the test suite developers should
> >> >> ideally only use the sut/tg node objects and those objects should
> >> >> delegate logic further to their nested objects. More below.
> >> >>
> >> >> I have many comments about the implementation, but I haven't run it
> >> >> yet. I'm going to do that after this round of comments and I may have
> >> >> more ideas.
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 9:28 PM <jspewock@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > From: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Adds a new test suite for running smoke tests that verify general
> >> >> > configuration aspects of the system under test. If any of these
> tests
> >> >> > fail, the DTS execution terminates as part of a "fail-fast" model.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Signed-off-by: Jeremy Spewock <jspewock@iol.unh.edu>
> >> >> > ---
> >> >> > dts/conf.yaml | 9 ++
> >> >> > dts/framework/config/__init__.py | 21 +++++
> >> >> > dts/framework/config/conf_yaml_schema.json | 32 ++++++-
> >> >> > dts/framework/dts.py | 19 +++-
> >> >> > dts/framework/exception.py | 11 +++
> >> >> > dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py | 6 +-
> >> >> > .../remote_session/remote/__init__.py | 28 ++++++
> >> >> > dts/framework/test_result.py | 13 ++-
> >> >> > dts/framework/test_suite.py | 24 ++++-
> >> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py | 5 +
> >> >> > .../interactive_apps/__init__.py | 6 ++
> >> >> > .../interactive_apps/interactive_command.py | 57 +++++++++++
> >> >> > .../interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py | 24 +++++
> >> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py | 2 +
> >> >> > dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py | 6 ++
> >> >> > dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py | 94
> +++++++++++++++++++
> >> >> > 16 files changed, 348 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> >> >> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> >> >> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> >> >> > create mode 100644
> dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> >> >>
> >> >> Let's not add any more levels. I don't like even the current hw
> >> >> subdirectory (which I want to remove in the docs patch) and we don't
> >> >> need it. I'd also like to move this functionality into
> remote_session,
> >> >> as it's handling a type of remote session.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I think it makes sense to add a proper wrapper for it, I just didn't
> create a subclass for it off of remote_session because the idea behind it
> was only allowing users to interact with the session through the
> InteractiveScriptHandler/DPDK app handlers. If it were part of the
> remote_session class it would have to include operations for sending
> commands the way it is written now. I could do this but it seems like a
> bigger discussion about whether interactive sessions should create a new
> SSH session every time or instead just use one existing session and create
> channels off of it.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I wasn't clear, I meant to move the python modules into the
> >> remote_session folder. The subclassing would be there only to have a
> >> common API across these remote sessions (as the
> >> InteractiveScriptHandler is a kind of a remote session). If at all
> >> possible, this should be our aim.
> >
> >
> > I see what you mean now, moving them there shouldn't be a problem.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > create mode 100644 dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> >> >> >
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/conf.yaml b/dts/conf.yaml
> >> >> > index a9bd8a3e..042ef954 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/conf.yaml
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/conf.yaml
> >> >> > @@ -10,13 +10,22 @@ executions:
> >> >> > compiler_wrapper: ccache
> >> >> > perf: false
> >> >> > func: true
> >> >> > + nics: #physical devices to be used for testing
> >> >> > + - addresses:
> >> >> > + - "0000:11:00.0"
> >> >> > + - "0000:11:00.1"
> >> >> > + driver: "i40e"
> >> >> > + vdevs: #names of virtual devices to be used for testing
> >> >> > + - "crypto_openssl"
> >> >>
> >> >> I believe we specified the NICs under SUTs in the original DTS, just
> >> >> as Owen did in his internal GitLab patch. If you can access it, have
> a
> >> >> look at how he did it.
> >> >> This brings an interesting question of where we want to specify which
> >> >> NICs/vdevs to test. It could be on the SUT level, but also on the
> >> >> execution or even the build target level. This should be informed by
> >> >> testing needs. What makes the most sense? We could specify NIC
> details
> >> >> per SUT/TG and then just reference the NICs on the execution/build
> >> >> target level.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I put it on the execution level with the thought that you might have
> multiple NICs in your SUT but want to separate them into different
> executions.
> >>
> >> This is a good point. Is this something you're interested in in the
> >> lab? We should ask Lijuan what she thinks of this. In general, I like
> >> this, so we should at least think of how to add NIC config
> >> implementation so that we could add this later if we're not adding it
> >> now.
> >>
> >> > I guess in the case of smoke tests, you'd only need to know them per
> target because it was talked about previously that then is when we should
> run the smoke tests. I think however it would make sense to specify the NIC
> you are using for that execution rather than having to assume or specify
> elsewhere.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Nothing is set in stone, we don't have to run them per build target.
> >> We could have two smoke test suites, one per execution and one per
> >> build target. I actually like that a lot and we should explore that.
> >> If it's not much extra work, we could just do the split like that.
> >>
> >
> > I also like the sound of that. In theory it doesn't seem that hard, if
> we made two different suites that tested different things all that needs to
> change is when they are run. This would probably take some more planning as
> to what we want to run at which points during the run and it might be
> easier to get these tests in a better spot first. I do like the idea
> though, and agree that it's worth exploring.
> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > test_suites:
> >> >> > + - smoke_tests
> >> >> > - hello_world
> >> >> > system_under_test: "SUT 1"
> >> >> > nodes:
> >> >> > - name: "SUT 1"
> >> >> > hostname: sut1.change.me.localhost
> >> >> > user: root
> >> >> > + password: ""
> >> >>
> >> >> This was deliberately left out to discourage the use of passwords.
> >> >>
> >> >> > arch: x86_64
> >> >> > os: linux
> >> >> > lcores: ""
> >> >>
> >> >> <snip>
> >> >>
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/dts.py b/dts/framework/dts.py
> >> >> > index 05022845..0d03e158 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/dts.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/dts.py
> >> >> > @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
> >> >> >
> >> >> > import sys
> >> >> >
> >> >> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > from .config import CONFIGURATION, BuildTargetConfiguration,
> ExecutionConfiguration
> >> >> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
> >> >> > from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult,
> ExecutionResult, Result
> >> >> > @@ -49,6 +51,7 @@ def run_all() -> None:
> >> >> > nodes[sut_node.name] = sut_node
> >> >> >
> >> >> > if sut_node:
> >> >> > + #SMOKE TEST EXECUTION GOES HERE!
> >> >> > _run_execution(sut_node, execution, result)
> >> >> >
> >> >> > except Exception as e:
> >> >> > @@ -118,7 +121,7 @@ def _run_build_target(
> >> >> >
> >> >> > try:
> >> >> > sut_node.set_up_build_target(build_target)
> >> >> > - result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
> >> >> > + # result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
> >> >> > build_target_result.update_setup(Result.PASS)
> >> >> > except Exception as e:
> >> >> > dts_logger.exception("Build target setup failed.")
> >> >> > @@ -146,6 +149,7 @@ def _run_suites(
> >> >> > with possibly only a subset of test cases.
> >> >> > If no subset is specified, run all test cases.
> >> >> > """
> >> >> > + end_execution = False
> >> >>
> >> >> This only ends the build target stage, not the execution stage. We
> >> >> should either find a better name for the variable or make sure that
> >> >> the whole execution is blocked. I think we're aiming for the latter -
> >> >> maybe we could just check whether the last exception in result is a
> >> >> BlockingTestSuiteError (or better, just call a new method of result
> >> >> that will check that), which we could do at multiple stages.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Good catch. When writing this and figuring out how to get it to work,
> I was thinking about smoke tests on a per build target basis because if it
> failed on one build target it could theoretically pass on another, but
> you'd likely want your entire execution to fail than have partial results.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Well, these will be well defined partial results (and definitely
> >> valuable, imagine one build target passing and one failing, we could
> >> easily compare the two to sometimes quickly identify the failure), so
> >> if there's a possibility that the test would pass on another build
> >> target, we should try to run the build target.
> >>
> >> In this case, let's just rename the variable to end_build_target or
> >> something similar.
> >>
> >
> > Alright, will do.
> >
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > for test_suite_config in execution.test_suites:
> >> >> > try:
> >> >> > full_suite_path =
> f"tests.TestSuite_{test_suite_config.test_suite}"
> >> >> > @@ -160,13 +164,24 @@ def _run_suites(
> >> >> >
> >> >> > else:
> >> >> > for test_suite_class in test_suite_classes:
> >> >> > + #HERE NEEDS CHANGING
> >> >> > test_suite = test_suite_class(
> >> >> > sut_node,
> >> >> > test_suite_config.test_cases,
> >> >> > execution.func,
> >> >> > build_target_result,
> >> >> > + sut_node._build_target_config,
> >> >> > + result
> >> >> > )
> >> >> > - test_suite.run()
> >> >> > + try:
> >> >> > + test_suite.run()
> >> >> > + except BlockingTestSuiteError as e:
> >> >> > + dts_logger.exception("An error occurred
> within a blocking TestSuite, execution will now end.")
> >> >> > + result.add_error(e)
> >> >> > + end_execution = True
> >> >> > + #if a blocking test failed and we need to bail out of
> suite executions
> >> >> > + if end_execution:
> >> >> > + break
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def _exit_dts() -> None:
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/exception.py
> b/dts/framework/exception.py
> >> >> > index ca353d98..4e3f63d1 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/exception.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/exception.py
> >> >> > @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ class ErrorSeverity(IntEnum):
> >> >> > SSH_ERR = 4
> >> >> > DPDK_BUILD_ERR = 10
> >> >> > TESTCASE_VERIFY_ERR = 20
> >> >> > + BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR = 25
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > class DTSError(Exception):
> >> >> > @@ -144,3 +145,13 @@ def __init__(self, value: str):
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def __str__(self) -> str:
> >> >> > return repr(self.value)
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +class BlockingTestSuiteError(DTSError):
> >> >> > + suite_name: str
> >> >> > + severity: ClassVar[ErrorSeverity] =
> ErrorSeverity.BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def __init__(self, suite_name:str) -> None:
> >> >> > + self.suite_name = suite_name
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def __str__(self) -> str:
> >> >> > + return f"Blocking suite {self.suite_name} failed."
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> >> >> > index 4c48ae25..22776bc1 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/os_session.py
> >> >> > @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
> >> >> > from framework.testbed_model import LogicalCore
> >> >> > from framework.utils import EnvVarsDict, MesonArgs
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession,
> create_remote_session
> >> >> > +from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession,
> create_remote_session, create_interactive_session
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > class OSSession(ABC):
> >> >> > @@ -26,6 +28,7 @@ class OSSession(ABC):
> >> >> > name: str
> >> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
> >> >> > remote_session: RemoteSession
> >> >> > + _interactive_session: SSHClient
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def __init__(
> >> >> > self,
> >> >> > @@ -37,6 +40,7 @@ def __init__(
> >> >> > self.name = name
> >> >> > self._logger = logger
> >> >> > self.remote_session = create_remote_session(node_config,
> name, logger)
> >> >> > + self._interactive_session =
> create_interactive_session(node_config, name, logger)
> >> >>
> >> >> This session should be stored in SutNode (it should be os-agnostic
> >> >> (the apps should behave the same on all os's, right?) and SutNode
> >> >> could use it without accessing another object), but created in
> >> >> OSSession (this way we make sure any os-specific inputs (such as
> >> >> paths) are passed properly).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I can move it into SutNode, the main reason I left it there is
> because I was essentially thinking of it the same way as the remote session
> that gets created once per node. However, I could just as easily have
> SutNode store it and call upon OSSession to create one inside its
> constructor. This would make creating classes for DPDK apps easier as well
> once those are subclasses of the InteractiveScriptHandler.
> >> >
> >>
> >> I was thinking of this interactive session more like
> >> Node._other_sessions, created only when needed. Now that I think about
> >> it, it's always going to be needed if we use it in smoke tests, so we
> >> might as well create it in OSSession (or its subclasses if needed).
> >>
> >> Thinking further, we want to use only the app driver object in test
> >> suites. So the SutNode object should have a method that returns the
> >> object and the rest of the implementation needs to be delegated to the
> >> rest of the objects in the hierarchy to ensure proper remote OS
> >> handling.
> >
> >
> > I like the sound of this. If we use a method and something like an enum
> inside of SutNode as well to create these objects then we don't even really
> need a method to return this object because it would never be interacted
> with directly.
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def close(self, force: bool = False) -> None:
> >> >> > """
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> >> >> > index 8a151221..abca8edc 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/remote_session/remote/__init__.py
> >> >> > @@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
> >> >> > from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
> >> >> > from .ssh_session import SSHSession
> >> >> >
> >> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
> >> >> > +from framework.utils import GREEN
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def create_remote_session(
> >> >> > node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> >> >> > ) -> RemoteSession:
> >> >> > return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +def create_interactive_session(
> >> >> > + node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
> >> >> > +) -> SSHClient:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used
> for interactive shells
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and
> may never be utilized
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
> >> >> > + client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
> >> >> > + ip: str = node_config.hostname
> >> >> > + logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
> >> >>
> >> >> Using colors is a remnant from the original DTS. If we want to
> >> >> (re-)introduce colors I'd do that in a separate patch in a uniform
> >> >> manner.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I agree this is likely outside the scope of this patch and the color
> here really isn't necessary either so I'll remove it.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > + #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
> >> >> > + port: int = 22
> >> >>
> >> >> This configuration handling should be moved to NodeConfiguration.
> >> >> The logic should also be moved to InteractiveScriptHandler. We also
> >> >> probably don't need a factory for this.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I agree that the configuration could be moved into NodeConfiguration,
> however the reason I use a factory and don't have this connect logic inside
> InteractiveScriptHandler is because that would mean there would have to be
> an SSH session per application. This is one potential solution, but what I
> am doing here instead is creating one SSH session for interactive scripts
> at the start alongside the usual remote session. This session essentially
> exists in the background for the duration of the execution and then each
> application for DPDK creates a channel off that session when they are
> created. Then, when you are done using the application, it closes the
> channel but the session itself stays open.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Ok, I see. What do you think about this:
> >> Let's then move the session creation into a subclass of RemoteSession.
> >> The session would be stored as a class variable and with that we could
> >> subclass further:
> >> RemoteSession -> new subclass -> InteractiveScriptHandler -> DpdkApp
> >>
> >> Everything could be handled from within the DdpdkApp objects, but we'd
> >> need to be careful about cleanup (maybe we'd only need to check that
> >> there are no open channels when closing the session).
> >>
> >> Or alternatively, the new subclass could just have a method that
> >> returns DpdkApps. We'd have two different class relations:
> >> RemoteSession -> new subclass and InteractiveScriptHandler -> DpdkApp.
> >>
> >> I'd put all of the classes into the remote_session directory.
> >>
> >
> > I like the idea of making a subclass of the remote session and then a
> method in the subclass that generates DpdkApps. This way you have a proper
> class that maintains the interactive session and InteractiveScriptHandlers
> as well as any other DpdkApp can be created and destroyed as needed. The
> only reason I wouldn't make InteractiveScriptHandler a subclass of
> RemoteSession is because then it would make the InteractiveScriptHandler
> something that stored the main SSH session rather than something that just
> uses it to make a channel.
> >
> > Originally, I avoided this because I didn't want to implement the
> send_command methods from inside RemoteSession, but a solution to this
> could just be creating an InteractiveScriptHandler, sending the command
> blindly, and not returning the output. Or maybe there would be some kind of
> default prompt I could expect to still collect the output, but I'm not sure
> there would be something that is os-agnostic for this. I'm not sure the
> best way to show that I don't want people to use the method on the new
> subclass that I'm going to create though. I guess one way to handle this
> would be just not creating a method that returns this subclass in SutNode.
> SutNode could just have a method that returns DPDK apps which should
> discourage touching this session directly.
> >
>
> Ah right, the fact that the workflow with interactive sessions is a
> bit different doesn't make subclassing RemoteSession ideal - the
> abstract methods _send_command and copy_file don't make much sense in
> the new class.
>
> With that in mind, I think we have two options:
> 1. Don't use one session with multiple channels. This would make it
> more in line with RemoteSession, but the copy_file method still
> doesn't make sense, so I prefer 2.
> 2. Don't subclass RemoteSession as it's a bit too different from what
> we need. Just create a new class (named InteractiveRemoteSession
> perpahs) that would basically be a factory for drivers (with two parts
> - ssh session init and then the creation of driver/app objects). The
> InteractiveScriptHandler (I'm thinking of renaming it to
> InteractiveShell now) -> DpdkApp would be the other part. I'd put
> InteractiveRemoteSession and InteractiveScriptHandler/InteractiveShell
> into the same file (those two basically define the API on the user and
> developer side).
>
I think I also prefer 2, I can work on putting that together. These
comments definitely gave me a lot of good insight into where to go from
here though, thank you!
>
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > + if ":" in node_config.hostname:
> >> >> > + ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
> >> >> > + port = int(port)
> >> >> > + client.connect(
> >> >> > + ip,
> >> >> > + username=node_config.user,
> >> >> > + port=port,
> >> >> > + password=node_config.password or "",
> >> >> > + timeout=20 if port else 10
> >> >> > + )
> >> >> > + return client
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_result.py
> b/dts/framework/test_result.py
> >> >> > index 74391982..77202ae2 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/test_result.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_result.py
> >> >> > @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> >> >> > import os.path
> >> >> > from collections.abc import MutableSequence
> >> >> > from enum import Enum, auto
> >> >> > +from typing import Dict
> >> >> >
> >> >> > from .config import (
> >> >> > OS,
> >> >> > @@ -67,12 +68,13 @@ class Statistics(dict):
> >> >> > Using a dict provides a convenient way to format the data.
> >> >> > """
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - def __init__(self, dpdk_version):
> >> >> > + def __init__(self, output_info: Dict[str, str] | None):
> >> >> > super(Statistics, self).__init__()
> >> >> > for result in Result:
> >> >> > self[result.name] = 0
> >> >> > self["PASS RATE"] = 0.0
> >> >> > - self["DPDK VERSION"] = dpdk_version
> >> >> > + if output_info:
> >> >> > + for info_key, info_val in output_info.items():
> self[info_key] = info_val
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def __iadd__(self, other: Result) -> "Statistics":
> >> >> > """
> >> >> > @@ -258,6 +260,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
> >> >> > """
> >> >> >
> >> >> > dpdk_version: str | None
> >> >> > + output: dict | None
> >> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
> >> >> > _errors: list[Exception]
> >> >> > _return_code: ErrorSeverity
> >> >> > @@ -267,6 +270,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
> >> >> > def __init__(self, logger: DTSLOG):
> >> >> > super(DTSResult, self).__init__()
> >> >> > self.dpdk_version = None
> >> >> > + self.output = None
> >> >> > self._logger = logger
> >> >> > self._errors = []
> >> >> > self._return_code = ErrorSeverity.NO_ERR
> >> >> > @@ -296,7 +300,10 @@ def process(self) -> None:
> >> >> > for error in self._errors:
> >> >> > self._logger.debug(repr(error))
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - self._stats_result = Statistics(self.dpdk_version)
> >> >> > + self._stats_result = Statistics(self.output)
> >> >> > + #add information gathered from the smoke tests to the
> statistics
> >> >> > + # for info_key, info_val in smoke_test_info.items():
> self._stats_result[info_key] = info_val
> >> >> > + # print(self._stats_result)
> >> >> > self.add_stats(self._stats_result)
> >> >> > with open(self._stats_filename, "w+") as stats_file:
> >> >> > stats_file.write(str(self._stats_result))
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> >> >> > index 0705f38f..1518fb8a 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/test_suite.py
> >> >> > @@ -10,11 +10,14 @@
> >> >> > import inspect
> >> >> > import re
> >> >> > from types import MethodType
> >> >> > +from typing import Dict
> >> >> >
> >> >> > -from .exception import ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError,
> TestCaseVerifyError
> >> >> > +from .config import BuildTargetConfiguration
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError,
> ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
> >> >> > from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
> >> >> > from .settings import SETTINGS
> >> >> > -from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, Result,
> TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
> >> >> > +from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, Result,
> TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
> >> >> > from .testbed_model import SutNode
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > @@ -37,10 +40,12 @@ class TestSuite(object):
> >> >> > """
> >> >> >
> >> >> > sut_node: SutNode
> >> >> > + is_blocking = False
> >> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
> >> >> > _test_cases_to_run: list[str]
> >> >> > _func: bool
> >> >> > _result: TestSuiteResult
> >> >> > + _dts_result: DTSResult
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def __init__(
> >> >> > self,
> >> >> > @@ -48,6 +53,8 @@ def __init__(
> >> >> > test_cases: list[str],
> >> >> > func: bool,
> >> >> > build_target_result: BuildTargetResult,
> >> >> > + build_target_conf: BuildTargetConfiguration,
> >> >> > + dts_result: DTSResult
> >> >> > ):
> >> >> > self.sut_node = sut_node
> >> >> > self._logger = getLogger(self.__class__.__name__)
> >> >> > @@ -55,6 +62,8 @@ def __init__(
> >> >> > self._test_cases_to_run.extend(SETTINGS.test_cases)
> >> >> > self._func = func
> >> >> > self._result =
> build_target_result.add_test_suite(self.__class__.__name__)
> >> >> > + self.build_target_info = build_target_conf
> >> >> > + self._dts_result = dts_result
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
> >> >> > """
> >> >> > @@ -118,6 +127,9 @@ def run(self) -> None:
> >> >> > f"the next test suite may be affected."
> >> >> > )
> >> >> > self._result.update_setup(Result.ERROR, e)
> >> >> > + if len(self._result.get_errors()) > 0 and
> self.is_blocking:
> >> >> > + raise BlockingTestSuiteError(test_suite_name)
> >> >> > +
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
> >> >> > """
> >> >> > @@ -137,6 +149,7 @@ def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
> >> >> > f"Attempt number {attempt_nr} out of
> {all_attempts}."
> >> >> > )
> >> >> > self._run_test_case(test_case_method,
> test_case_result)
> >> >> > +
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def _get_functional_test_cases(self) -> list[MethodType]:
> >> >> > """
> >> >> > @@ -232,6 +245,11 @@ def _execute_test_case(
> >> >> > test_case_result.update(Result.SKIP)
> >> >> > raise KeyboardInterrupt("Stop DTS")
> >> >> >
> >> >> > + def write_to_statistics_file(self, output: Dict[str, str]):
> >> >> > + if self._dts_result.output != None:
> >> >> > + self._dts_result.output.update(output)
> >> >> > + else:
> >> >> > + self._dts_result.output = output
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def get_test_suites(testsuite_module_path: str) ->
> list[type[TestSuite]]:
> >> >> > def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
> >> >> > @@ -252,3 +270,5 @@ def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
> >> >> > test_suite_class
> >> >> > for _, test_suite_class in
> inspect.getmembers(testcase_module, is_test_suite)
> >> >> > ]
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> >> >> > index f54a9470..63f17cc3 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/__init__.py
> >> >> > @@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
> >> >> > )
> >> >> > from .node import Node
> >> >> > from .sut_node import SutNode
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +from .interactive_apps import (
> >> >> > + InteractiveScriptHandler,
> >> >> > + TestpmdDriver
> >> >> > +)
> >> >> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> >> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> >> > index 00000000..0382d7e0
> >> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/__init__.py
> >> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
> >> >> > +from .interactive_command import (
> >> >> > + InteractiveScriptHandler
> >> >> > +)
> >> >> > +from .testpmd_driver import (
> >> >> > + TestpmdDriver
> >> >> > +)
> >> >> > \ No newline at end of file
> >> >> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> >> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> >> > index 00000000..7467911b
> >> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> >> > +++
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/interactive_command.py
> >> >>
> >> >> In general, the file name should match the class name.
> >> >>
> >> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
> >> >> > +# import paramiko
> >> >> > +from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
> >> >> > +from framework.settings import SETTINGS
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +class InteractiveScriptHandler:
> >> >>
> >> >> Once merged with the init functionality and moved to remote_session,
> >> >> I'd rename it to InteractiveAppSession or something similar.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Good point, I'll rename the class and the file.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + _ssh_client: SSHClient
> >> >> > + _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
> >> >> > + _ssh_channel: Channel
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float =
> SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
> >> >> > + self._ssh_client = ssh_client
> >> >> > + self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
> >> >> > + self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
> >> >> > + self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Send command to channel without recording output.
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + This method will not verify any input or output, it will
> >> >> > + simply assume the command succeeded
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> >> >> > + self._stdin.flush()
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) ->
> str:
> >> >>
> >> >> Let's rename expect to prompt. At least for me it was just confusing
> >> >> in the original DTS.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > It definitely can be confusing, I'll change it accordingly as you're
> right, prompt is more clear.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Send a command and get all output before the expected
> ending string.
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + **NOTE**
> >> >> > + Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout
> buffer so they cannot be
> >> >> > + used for expect. For example, if you were prompted to log
> into something
> >> >> > + with a username and password, you cannot expect
> "username:" because it wont
> >> >> > + yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could
> be consuming an
> >> >> > + extra newline character to force the current prompt into
> the stdout buffer.
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + *Return*
> >> >> > + All output before expected string
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
> >> >> > + self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
> >> >> > + self._stdin.flush()
> >> >> > + out:str = ""
> >> >> > + for line in stdout:
> >> >> > + out += str(line)
> >> >> > + if expect in str(line):
> >> >> > + break
> >> >> > + stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
> >> >> > + return out
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def close(self):
> >> >> > + self._stdin.close()
> >> >> > + self._ssh_channel.close()
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def __del__(self):
> >> >> > + self.close()
> >> >> > diff --git
> a/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> >> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> >> > index 00000000..1993eae6
> >> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> >> > +++
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/interactive_apps/testpmd_driver.py
> >> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
> >> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import
> InteractiveScriptHandler
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +from pathlib import PurePath
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +class TestpmdDriver:
> >> >>
> >> >> This could also be called TestPmdSession. Not sure which is better.
> >> >> This should extend InteractiveScriptHandler, which should contain
> >> >> basic functionality common to all apps and then the drivers would
> >> >> contain app-specific functionality.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Originally the reason I avoided doing this was because I viewed them
> as separate layers of the process essentially. I wrote it in a way where
> the InteractiveScriptHandler was almost like an interface for any CLI and
> then DPDK apps could interact with this interface, but after thinking about
> it more, this isn't necessary. There is no reason really that the
> applications themselves can't just use these methods directly and it also
> avoids the need to have a reference to the handler within the object.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > + prompt:str = "testpmd>"
> >> >> > + interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler,
> dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") ->
> None:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts
> testpmd
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + self.interactive_handler = handler
> >> >> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
> >> >> > + # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd
> /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
> >> >> > +
> self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd
> {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
> >> >>
> >> >> The paths need to be handled in os-agnostic manner in os_session and
> >> >> then passed here.
> >> >>
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) ->
> str:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + An extra newline character is consumed in order to force
> the current line into the stdout buffer
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + return
> self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command + "\n", expect)
> >> >> > \ No newline at end of file
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> >> >> > index d48fafe6..c5147e0e 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/node.py
> >> >> > @@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ class Node(object):
> >> >> > lcores: list[LogicalCore]
> >> >> > _logger: DTSLOG
> >> >> > _other_sessions: list[OSSession]
> >> >> > + _execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def __init__(self, node_config: NodeConfiguration):
> >> >> > self.config = node_config
> >> >> > @@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ def set_up_execution(self, execution_config:
> ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
> >> >> > """
> >> >> > self._setup_hugepages()
> >> >> > self._set_up_execution(execution_config)
> >> >> > + self._execution_config = execution_config
> >> >> >
> >> >> > def _set_up_execution(self, execution_config:
> ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
> >> >> > """
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> >> >> > index 2b2b50d9..8c39a66d 100644
> >> >> > --- a/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/framework/testbed_model/sut_node.py
> >> >> > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> >> >> >
> >> >> > from .hw import LogicalCoreCount, LogicalCoreList, VirtualDevice
> >> >> > from .node import Node
> >> >> > +from .interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > class SutNode(Node):
> >> >> > @@ -261,6 +262,11 @@ def run_dpdk_app(
> >> >> > return self.main_session.send_command(
> >> >> > f"{app_path} {eal_args}", timeout, verify=True
> >> >> > )
> >> >> > + def create_interactive_session_handler(self) ->
> InteractiveScriptHandler:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Create a handler for interactive sessions
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + return
> InteractiveScriptHandler(self.main_session._interactive_session)
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > class EalParameters(object):
> >> >> > diff --git a/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> >> >> > new file mode 100644
> >> >> > index 00000000..bacf289d
> >> >> > --- /dev/null
> >> >> > +++ b/dts/tests/TestSuite_smoke_tests.py
> >> >> > @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
> >> >> > +from framework.test_suite import TestSuite
> >> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.sut_node import SutNode
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import TestpmdDriver
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +def get_compiler_version(compiler_name: str, sut_node: SutNode)
> -> str:
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't see a reason why this is outside SmokeTest.
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > + match compiler_name:
> >> >> > + case "gcc":
> >> >> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version",
> 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
> >> >>
> >> >> As I alluded to earlier, the call here should be
> >> >> sut_node.get_compiler_version(). This is to hide implementation
> >> >> details from test suite developers.
> >> >> Then, SutNode.get_compiler_version should then call
> >> >> self.main_session.get_compiler_version(). The reason here is this is
> >> >> an os-agnostic call.
> >> >> get_compiler_version() should then be defined in os_session and
> >> >> implemented in os specific classes.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I originally placed the method outside of smoke tests just so it
> wouldn't be run with the rest of the suite but it does make sense to make
> this and the other comments os-agnostic.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > + case "clang":
> >> >> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version",
> 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
> >> >> > + case "msvc":
> >> >> > + return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"cl",
> 60).stdout
> >> >> > + case "icc":
> >> >> > + return
> sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} -V", 60).stdout
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +class SmokeTests(TestSuite):
> >> >> > + is_blocking = True
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Setup:
> >> >> > + build all DPDK
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + self.dpdk_build_dir_path =
> self.sut_node.remote_dpdk_build_dir
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def test_unit_tests(self) -> None:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Test:
> >> >> > + run the fast-test unit-test suite through meson
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C
> {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite fast-tests", 300)
> >> >>
> >> >> Same here, there already are methods that build dpdk. If anything
> >> >> needs to be added, we should expand those methods.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I don't think this is building DPDK, this is just running fast tests
> and ensuring that you are in the correct directory.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Ah, right. These would be probably used only in smoke tests, so it's
> >> probably fine to leave them here. Maybe we could add a method to the
> >> suite? I'm thinking it would make the code a bit more readable.
> >>
> >
> > I could look into this.
> >
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def test_driver_tests(self) -> None:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Test:
> >> >> > + run the driver-test unit-test suite through meson
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + list_of_vdevs = ""
> >> >> > + for dev in self.sut_node._execution_config.vdevs:
> >> >> > + list_of_vdevs += f"{dev},"
> >> >> > + print(list_of_vdevs)
> >> >> > + if len(list_of_vdevs) > 0:
> >> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test
> -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests --test-args \"--vdev
> {list_of_vdevs}\"", 300)
> >> >> > + else:
> >> >> > + self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test
> -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests", 300)
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def test_gather_info(self) -> None:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Test:
> >> >> > + gather information about the system and send output
> to statistics.txt
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + out = {}
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + out['OS'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk
> -F= '$1==\"NAME\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60).stdout
> >> >> > + out["OS VERSION"] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"VERSION\" {print
> $2}' /etc/os-release", 60, True).stdout
> >> >> > + out["COMPILER VERSION"] = get_compiler_version(
> self.build_target_info.compiler.name, self.sut_node)
> >> >> > + out["DPDK VERSION"] = self.sut_node.dpdk_version
> >> >> > + if self.build_target_info.os.name == "linux":
> >> >> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -r", 60).stdout
> >> >> > + elif self.build_target_info.os.name == "windows":
> >> >> > + out['KERNEL VERSION'] =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -a", 60).stdout
> >> >> > + self.write_to_statistics_file(out)
> >> >> > +
> >> >>
> >> >> This is not really a test. If we want to add this, it should be
> stored
> >> >> elsewhere (in their respective objects, probably in result objects).
> >> >> Three of these (os, os and kernel versions) are node data, the
> >> >> remaining two are build target data.
> >> >> I'm not sure it's a good idea to put these into statistics, as the
> >> >> statistics are aggregated over all executions and build targets. In
> >> >> case of multiple SUTs (in different executions) and multiple build
> >> >> targets we'd record misleading data. We could include data from all
> >> >> build targets and SUTs though.
> >> >> The reason we (and original DTS) are storing DPDK version in the
> >> >> current manner is that that doesn't change across anything, we're
> >> >> always testing the same tarball.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > You're right that this isn't really testing anything, I had
> originally included it here because it was just part of the smoke test
> outline. It's definitely out of place though and I can move it out to their
> respective classes. I think it might make sense to organize/label data
> based on the SUT it comes from, I just thought statistics made the most
> sense because you could see the test statistics as well as what it was
> testing in one place.
> >> >
> >>
> >> We could put anything we want into statistics (it's not a good idea
> >> now, but if we change the format of statistics it'd be fine, but I
> >> think changing the format is out of the scope of this patch) and this
> >> would make sense there, but the first step is properly storing the
> >> data. Moving them to statistics would be trivial then.
> >>
> >
> > Right, that makes sense.
> >
> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def test_start_testpmd(self) -> None:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Creates and instance of the testpmd driver to run the
> testpmd app
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + driver: TestpmdDriver =
> TestpmdDriver(self.sut_node.create_interactive_session_handler(),
> self.dpdk_build_dir_path)
> >> >>
> >> >> The driver should be returned by a method of self.sut_node.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Does it make more sense to have methods for creating handlers for
> various DPDK apps in SutNode? I had assumed it would be cleaner to just
> make the classes as needed so that you don't have multiple methods doing
> something very similar in SutNode (basically just making a class with a
> different name that takes in similar information). I suppose that if you
> were trying to have developers only interact with the SutNode class this
> makes sense.
> >> >
> >>
> >> That's what I meant. The method would return the appropriate app based
> >> on input (which could be an enum) - I think that's preferable to
> >> having a method for each app. We should think about non-interactive
> >> apps here as well (such as the helloworld app that's already in use).
> >>
> >
> > I like this idea for how to handle the creation of the DpdkApps.
> >
> >>
> >> > This is also something that could make good use of having the
> SSHClient in the SutNode and I could see how it would be useful.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + print(driver.send_command("show port summary all"))
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > + def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + Test:
> >> >> > + ensure that all drivers listed in the config are
> bound to the correct drivers
> >> >> > + """
> >> >> > + for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
> >> >> > + for address in nic.addresses:
> >> >> > + out =
> self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py
> --status | grep {address}", 60)
> >> >>
> >> >> This should follow the same abstractions as I outlined above.
> >> >> However, we don't need to use dpdk-devbind here. It's probably safe
> to
> >> >> do so (the script is likely not going to be changed), but we could
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > That's a good point about dev-bind, it might be better here to just
> avoid the reliance on another script.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> > + self.verify(
> >> >> > + len(out.stdout) != 0,
> >> >> > + f"Failed to find configured device
> ({address}) using dpdk-devbind.py",
> >> >> > + )
> >> >> > + for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
> >> >> > + if 'drv=' in string:
> >> >> > + self.verify(
> >> >> > + string.split("=")[1] ==
> nic.driver.strip(),
> >> >> > + f'Driver for device {address} does
> not match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
> >> >> > + )
> >> >> > +
> >> >> > \ No newline at end of file
> >> >> > --
> >> >> > 2.40.1
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I'll work on these changes, but I'd like to hear what you think about
> what I had mentioned about moving the connect logic to the
> InteractiveScriptHandler in the comments above. I had originally written it
> to use one session throughout rather than opening and closing SSH
> connections for every application but I'd like to hear which you think
> would be easier/better if there is a difference.
> >>
> >> Yes, let's do one session with each app having its own channel.
>
@@ -10,13 +10,22 @@ executions:
compiler_wrapper: ccache
perf: false
func: true
+ nics: #physical devices to be used for testing
+ - addresses:
+ - "0000:11:00.0"
+ - "0000:11:00.1"
+ driver: "i40e"
+ vdevs: #names of virtual devices to be used for testing
+ - "crypto_openssl"
test_suites:
+ - smoke_tests
- hello_world
system_under_test: "SUT 1"
nodes:
- name: "SUT 1"
hostname: sut1.change.me.localhost
user: root
+ password: ""
arch: x86_64
os: linux
lcores: ""
@@ -106,6 +106,21 @@ def from_dict(d: dict) -> "NodeConfiguration":
hugepages=hugepage_config,
)
+@dataclass(slots=True, frozen=True)
+class NICConfiguration:
+ addresses: list[str]
+ driver: str
+
+ @staticmethod
+ def from_dict(d:dict) -> "NICConfiguration":
+ return NICConfiguration(
+ addresses=[addr for addr in d.get("addresses", [])],
+ driver=d.get("driver")
+ )
+ @staticmethod
+ def from_list(l:list[dict]) -> list["NICConfiguration"]:
+ return [] + [NICConfiguration.from_dict(x) for x in l]
+
@dataclass(slots=True, frozen=True)
class BuildTargetConfiguration:
@@ -157,6 +172,8 @@ class ExecutionConfiguration:
func: bool
test_suites: list[TestSuiteConfig]
system_under_test: NodeConfiguration
+ nics: list[NICConfiguration]
+ vdevs: list[str]
@staticmethod
def from_dict(d: dict, node_map: dict) -> "ExecutionConfiguration":
@@ -166,7 +183,9 @@ def from_dict(d: dict, node_map: dict) -> "ExecutionConfiguration":
test_suites: list[TestSuiteConfig] = list(
map(TestSuiteConfig.from_dict, d["test_suites"])
)
+ nic_conf: NICConfiguration = NICConfiguration.from_list(d['nics'])
sut_name = d["system_under_test"]
+ list_of_vdevs = d["vdevs"]
assert sut_name in node_map, f"Unknown SUT {sut_name} in execution {d}"
return ExecutionConfiguration(
@@ -174,7 +193,9 @@ def from_dict(d: dict, node_map: dict) -> "ExecutionConfiguration":
perf=d["perf"],
func=d["func"],
test_suites=test_suites,
+ nics=nic_conf,
system_under_test=node_map[sut_name],
+ vdevs=list_of_vdevs
)
@@ -40,6 +40,18 @@
"mscv"
]
},
+ "single_nic" : {
+ "type":"object",
+ "description": "an object that holds nic information",
+ "properties": {
+ "addresses": {
+ "type":"array",
+ "items": {
+ "type":"string"
+ }
+ }
+ }
+ },
"build_target": {
"type": "object",
"description": "Targets supported by DTS",
@@ -97,7 +109,8 @@
"test_suite": {
"type": "string",
"enum": [
- "hello_world"
+ "hello_world",
+ "smoke_tests"
]
},
"test_target": {
@@ -211,6 +224,23 @@
]
}
},
+ "nics": {
+ "type": "array",
+ "items": {
+ "oneOf": [
+ {
+ "$ref": "#/definitions/single_nic"
+ }
+ ]
+ }
+ },
+ "vdevs": {
+ "description": "Names of vdevs to be used in execution",
+ "type": "array",
+ "items": {
+ "type":"string"
+ }
+ },
"system_under_test": {
"$ref": "#/definitions/node_name"
}
@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
import sys
+from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError
+
from .config import CONFIGURATION, BuildTargetConfiguration, ExecutionConfiguration
from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, ExecutionResult, Result
@@ -49,6 +51,7 @@ def run_all() -> None:
nodes[sut_node.name] = sut_node
if sut_node:
+ #SMOKE TEST EXECUTION GOES HERE!
_run_execution(sut_node, execution, result)
except Exception as e:
@@ -118,7 +121,7 @@ def _run_build_target(
try:
sut_node.set_up_build_target(build_target)
- result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
+ # result.dpdk_version = sut_node.dpdk_version
build_target_result.update_setup(Result.PASS)
except Exception as e:
dts_logger.exception("Build target setup failed.")
@@ -146,6 +149,7 @@ def _run_suites(
with possibly only a subset of test cases.
If no subset is specified, run all test cases.
"""
+ end_execution = False
for test_suite_config in execution.test_suites:
try:
full_suite_path = f"tests.TestSuite_{test_suite_config.test_suite}"
@@ -160,13 +164,24 @@ def _run_suites(
else:
for test_suite_class in test_suite_classes:
+ #HERE NEEDS CHANGING
test_suite = test_suite_class(
sut_node,
test_suite_config.test_cases,
execution.func,
build_target_result,
+ sut_node._build_target_config,
+ result
)
- test_suite.run()
+ try:
+ test_suite.run()
+ except BlockingTestSuiteError as e:
+ dts_logger.exception("An error occurred within a blocking TestSuite, execution will now end.")
+ result.add_error(e)
+ end_execution = True
+ #if a blocking test failed and we need to bail out of suite executions
+ if end_execution:
+ break
def _exit_dts() -> None:
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@ class ErrorSeverity(IntEnum):
SSH_ERR = 4
DPDK_BUILD_ERR = 10
TESTCASE_VERIFY_ERR = 20
+ BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR = 25
class DTSError(Exception):
@@ -144,3 +145,13 @@ def __init__(self, value: str):
def __str__(self) -> str:
return repr(self.value)
+
+class BlockingTestSuiteError(DTSError):
+ suite_name: str
+ severity: ClassVar[ErrorSeverity] = ErrorSeverity.BLOCKING_TESTSUITE_ERR
+
+ def __init__(self, suite_name:str) -> None:
+ self.suite_name = suite_name
+
+ def __str__(self) -> str:
+ return f"Blocking suite {self.suite_name} failed."
@@ -12,7 +12,9 @@
from framework.testbed_model import LogicalCore
from framework.utils import EnvVarsDict, MesonArgs
-from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session
+from .remote import CommandResult, RemoteSession, create_remote_session, create_interactive_session
+
+from paramiko import SSHClient
class OSSession(ABC):
@@ -26,6 +28,7 @@ class OSSession(ABC):
name: str
_logger: DTSLOG
remote_session: RemoteSession
+ _interactive_session: SSHClient
def __init__(
self,
@@ -37,6 +40,7 @@ def __init__(
self.name = name
self._logger = logger
self.remote_session = create_remote_session(node_config, name, logger)
+ self._interactive_session = create_interactive_session(node_config, name, logger)
def close(self, force: bool = False) -> None:
"""
@@ -9,8 +9,36 @@
from .remote_session import CommandResult, RemoteSession
from .ssh_session import SSHSession
+from paramiko import SSHClient, AutoAddPolicy
+from framework.utils import GREEN
def create_remote_session(
node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
) -> RemoteSession:
return SSHSession(node_config, name, logger)
+
+def create_interactive_session(
+ node_config: NodeConfiguration, name: str, logger: DTSLOG
+) -> SSHClient:
+ """
+ Creates a paramiko SSH session that is designed to be used for interactive shells
+
+ This session is meant to be used on an "as needed" basis and may never be utilized
+ """
+ client: SSHClient = SSHClient()
+ client.set_missing_host_key_policy(AutoAddPolicy)
+ ip: str = node_config.hostname
+ logger.info(GREEN(f"Connecting to host {ip}"))
+ #Preset to 22 because paramiko doesn't accept None
+ port: int = 22
+ if ":" in node_config.hostname:
+ ip, port = node_config.hostname.split(":")
+ port = int(port)
+ client.connect(
+ ip,
+ username=node_config.user,
+ port=port,
+ password=node_config.password or "",
+ timeout=20 if port else 10
+ )
+ return client
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
import os.path
from collections.abc import MutableSequence
from enum import Enum, auto
+from typing import Dict
from .config import (
OS,
@@ -67,12 +68,13 @@ class Statistics(dict):
Using a dict provides a convenient way to format the data.
"""
- def __init__(self, dpdk_version):
+ def __init__(self, output_info: Dict[str, str] | None):
super(Statistics, self).__init__()
for result in Result:
self[result.name] = 0
self["PASS RATE"] = 0.0
- self["DPDK VERSION"] = dpdk_version
+ if output_info:
+ for info_key, info_val in output_info.items(): self[info_key] = info_val
def __iadd__(self, other: Result) -> "Statistics":
"""
@@ -258,6 +260,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
"""
dpdk_version: str | None
+ output: dict | None
_logger: DTSLOG
_errors: list[Exception]
_return_code: ErrorSeverity
@@ -267,6 +270,7 @@ class DTSResult(BaseResult):
def __init__(self, logger: DTSLOG):
super(DTSResult, self).__init__()
self.dpdk_version = None
+ self.output = None
self._logger = logger
self._errors = []
self._return_code = ErrorSeverity.NO_ERR
@@ -296,7 +300,10 @@ def process(self) -> None:
for error in self._errors:
self._logger.debug(repr(error))
- self._stats_result = Statistics(self.dpdk_version)
+ self._stats_result = Statistics(self.output)
+ #add information gathered from the smoke tests to the statistics
+ # for info_key, info_val in smoke_test_info.items(): self._stats_result[info_key] = info_val
+ # print(self._stats_result)
self.add_stats(self._stats_result)
with open(self._stats_filename, "w+") as stats_file:
stats_file.write(str(self._stats_result))
@@ -10,11 +10,14 @@
import inspect
import re
from types import MethodType
+from typing import Dict
-from .exception import ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
+from .config import BuildTargetConfiguration
+
+from .exception import BlockingTestSuiteError, ConfigurationError, SSHTimeoutError, TestCaseVerifyError
from .logger import DTSLOG, getLogger
from .settings import SETTINGS
-from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, Result, TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
+from .test_result import BuildTargetResult, DTSResult, Result, TestCaseResult, TestSuiteResult
from .testbed_model import SutNode
@@ -37,10 +40,12 @@ class TestSuite(object):
"""
sut_node: SutNode
+ is_blocking = False
_logger: DTSLOG
_test_cases_to_run: list[str]
_func: bool
_result: TestSuiteResult
+ _dts_result: DTSResult
def __init__(
self,
@@ -48,6 +53,8 @@ def __init__(
test_cases: list[str],
func: bool,
build_target_result: BuildTargetResult,
+ build_target_conf: BuildTargetConfiguration,
+ dts_result: DTSResult
):
self.sut_node = sut_node
self._logger = getLogger(self.__class__.__name__)
@@ -55,6 +62,8 @@ def __init__(
self._test_cases_to_run.extend(SETTINGS.test_cases)
self._func = func
self._result = build_target_result.add_test_suite(self.__class__.__name__)
+ self.build_target_info = build_target_conf
+ self._dts_result = dts_result
def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
"""
@@ -118,6 +127,9 @@ def run(self) -> None:
f"the next test suite may be affected."
)
self._result.update_setup(Result.ERROR, e)
+ if len(self._result.get_errors()) > 0 and self.is_blocking:
+ raise BlockingTestSuiteError(test_suite_name)
+
def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
"""
@@ -137,6 +149,7 @@ def _execute_test_suite(self) -> None:
f"Attempt number {attempt_nr} out of {all_attempts}."
)
self._run_test_case(test_case_method, test_case_result)
+
def _get_functional_test_cases(self) -> list[MethodType]:
"""
@@ -232,6 +245,11 @@ def _execute_test_case(
test_case_result.update(Result.SKIP)
raise KeyboardInterrupt("Stop DTS")
+ def write_to_statistics_file(self, output: Dict[str, str]):
+ if self._dts_result.output != None:
+ self._dts_result.output.update(output)
+ else:
+ self._dts_result.output = output
def get_test_suites(testsuite_module_path: str) -> list[type[TestSuite]]:
def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
@@ -252,3 +270,5 @@ def is_test_suite(object) -> bool:
test_suite_class
for _, test_suite_class in inspect.getmembers(testcase_module, is_test_suite)
]
+
+
@@ -20,3 +20,8 @@
)
from .node import Node
from .sut_node import SutNode
+
+from .interactive_apps import (
+ InteractiveScriptHandler,
+ TestpmdDriver
+)
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
+from .interactive_command import (
+ InteractiveScriptHandler
+)
+from .testpmd_driver import (
+ TestpmdDriver
+)
\ No newline at end of file
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@
+# import paramiko
+from paramiko import SSHClient, Channel, channel
+from framework.settings import SETTINGS
+
+class InteractiveScriptHandler:
+
+ _ssh_client: SSHClient
+ _stdin: channel.ChannelStdinFile
+ _ssh_channel: Channel
+
+ def __init__(self, ssh_client: SSHClient, timeout:float = SETTINGS.timeout) -> None:
+ self._ssh_client = ssh_client
+ self._ssh_channel = self._ssh_client.invoke_shell()
+ self._stdin = self._ssh_channel.makefile_stdin("wb")
+ self._ssh_channel.settimeout(timeout)
+
+ def send_command(self, command:str) -> None:
+ """
+ Send command to channel without recording output.
+
+ This method will not verify any input or output, it will
+ simply assume the command succeeded
+ """
+ self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
+ self._stdin.flush()
+
+ def send_command_get_output(self, command:str, expect:str) -> str:
+ """
+ Send a command and get all output before the expected ending string.
+
+ **NOTE**
+ Lines that expect input are not included in the stdout buffer so they cannot be
+ used for expect. For example, if you were prompted to log into something
+ with a username and password, you cannot expect "username:" because it wont
+ yet be in the stdout buffer. A work around for this could be consuming an
+ extra newline character to force the current prompt into the stdout buffer.
+
+ *Return*
+ All output before expected string
+ """
+ stdout = self._ssh_channel.makefile("r")
+ self._stdin.write(command + '\n')
+ self._stdin.flush()
+ out:str = ""
+ for line in stdout:
+ out += str(line)
+ if expect in str(line):
+ break
+ stdout.close() #close the buffer to flush the output
+ return out
+
+ def close(self):
+ self._stdin.close()
+ self._ssh_channel.close()
+
+ def __del__(self):
+ self.close()
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,24 @@
+from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
+
+from pathlib import PurePath
+
+class TestpmdDriver:
+ prompt:str = "testpmd>"
+ interactive_handler: InteractiveScriptHandler
+
+ def __init__(self, handler: InteractiveScriptHandler, dpdk_build_dir:PurePath, eal_flags:str = "", cmd_line_options:str = "") -> None:
+ """
+ Sets the handler to drive the SSH session and starts testpmd
+ """
+ self.interactive_handler = handler
+ # self.interactive_handler.send_command("sudo su")
+ # self.interactive_handler.send_command("cd /root/testpmd-testing/dpdk/build")
+ self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(f"{dpdk_build_dir}/app/dpdk-testpmd {eal_flags} -- -i {cmd_line_options}\n", self.prompt)
+
+ def send_command(self, command:str, expect:str = prompt) -> str:
+ """
+ Specific way of handling the command for testpmd
+
+ An extra newline character is consumed in order to force the current line into the stdout buffer
+ """
+ return self.interactive_handler.send_command_get_output(command + "\n", expect)
\ No newline at end of file
@@ -40,6 +40,7 @@ class Node(object):
lcores: list[LogicalCore]
_logger: DTSLOG
_other_sessions: list[OSSession]
+ _execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration
def __init__(self, node_config: NodeConfiguration):
self.config = node_config
@@ -64,6 +65,7 @@ def set_up_execution(self, execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
"""
self._setup_hugepages()
self._set_up_execution(execution_config)
+ self._execution_config = execution_config
def _set_up_execution(self, execution_config: ExecutionConfiguration) -> None:
"""
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
from .hw import LogicalCoreCount, LogicalCoreList, VirtualDevice
from .node import Node
+from .interactive_apps import InteractiveScriptHandler
class SutNode(Node):
@@ -261,6 +262,11 @@ def run_dpdk_app(
return self.main_session.send_command(
f"{app_path} {eal_args}", timeout, verify=True
)
+ def create_interactive_session_handler(self) -> InteractiveScriptHandler:
+ """
+ Create a handler for interactive sessions
+ """
+ return InteractiveScriptHandler(self.main_session._interactive_session)
class EalParameters(object):
new file mode 100644
@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+from framework.test_suite import TestSuite
+from framework.testbed_model.sut_node import SutNode
+
+from framework.testbed_model.interactive_apps import TestpmdDriver
+
+def get_compiler_version(compiler_name: str, sut_node: SutNode) -> str:
+ match compiler_name:
+ case "gcc":
+ return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version", 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
+ case "clang":
+ return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} --version", 60).stdout.split("\n")[0]
+ case "msvc":
+ return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"cl", 60).stdout
+ case "icc":
+ return sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{compiler_name} -V", 60).stdout
+
+class SmokeTests(TestSuite):
+ is_blocking = True
+
+ def set_up_suite(self) -> None:
+ """
+ Setup:
+ build all DPDK
+ """
+ self.dpdk_build_dir_path = self.sut_node.remote_dpdk_build_dir
+
+
+ def test_unit_tests(self) -> None:
+ """
+ Test:
+ run the fast-test unit-test suite through meson
+ """
+ self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite fast-tests", 300)
+
+ def test_driver_tests(self) -> None:
+ """
+ Test:
+ run the driver-test unit-test suite through meson
+ """
+ list_of_vdevs = ""
+ for dev in self.sut_node._execution_config.vdevs:
+ list_of_vdevs += f"{dev},"
+ print(list_of_vdevs)
+ if len(list_of_vdevs) > 0:
+ self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests --test-args \"--vdev {list_of_vdevs}\"", 300)
+ else:
+ self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"meson test -C {self.dpdk_build_dir_path} --suite driver-tests", 300)
+
+ def test_gather_info(self) -> None:
+ """
+ Test:
+ gather information about the system and send output to statistics.txt
+ """
+ out = {}
+
+ out['OS'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"NAME\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60).stdout
+ out["OS VERSION"] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("awk -F= '$1==\"VERSION\" {print $2}' /etc/os-release", 60, True).stdout
+ out["COMPILER VERSION"] = get_compiler_version(self.build_target_info.compiler.name, self.sut_node)
+ out["DPDK VERSION"] = self.sut_node.dpdk_version
+ if self.build_target_info.os.name == "linux":
+ out['KERNEL VERSION'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -r", 60).stdout
+ elif self.build_target_info.os.name == "windows":
+ out['KERNEL VERSION'] = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command("uname -a", 60).stdout
+ self.write_to_statistics_file(out)
+
+
+
+ def test_start_testpmd(self) -> None:
+ """
+ Creates and instance of the testpmd driver to run the testpmd app
+ """
+ driver: TestpmdDriver = TestpmdDriver(self.sut_node.create_interactive_session_handler(), self.dpdk_build_dir_path)
+
+ print(driver.send_command("show port summary all"))
+
+ def test_device_bound_to_driver(self) -> None:
+ """
+ Test:
+ ensure that all drivers listed in the config are bound to the correct drivers
+ """
+ for nic in self.sut_node._execution_config.nics:
+ for address in nic.addresses:
+ out = self.sut_node.main_session.send_command(f"{self.dpdk_build_dir_path}/../usertools/dpdk-devbind.py --status | grep {address}", 60)
+ self.verify(
+ len(out.stdout) != 0,
+ f"Failed to find configured device ({address}) using dpdk-devbind.py",
+ )
+ for string in out.stdout.split(" "):
+ if 'drv=' in string:
+ self.verify(
+ string.split("=")[1] == nic.driver.strip(),
+ f'Driver for device {address} does not match driver listed in configuration (bound to {string.split("=")[1]})',
+ )
+
\ No newline at end of file