Hi Bret,
Thanks for posting this content. Host based unit testing is a very valuable
addition to the CI checks.
I have the following comments:
1. I see that MdePkg adds a dependency on UnitTestPkg. This makes
UnitTestPkg the root package when building and running host based unit tests.
This makes sense, but good to highlight that all packages that use host based
tests will introduce a new package dependency on UnitTestPkg.
* Since the dependency only applies to unit tests, can we update the
DependencyCheck plugin to support listing dependencies for FW components
separate from dependencies for unit tests?
2. I see UnitTestPkg declares 6 new lib classes. Are all 6 classes intended
to be used directly from a unit test case? If some of these are only intended
to be used from the framework inside the UnitTestPkg can we make them private?
3. In the MdePkg, I see a new top level directory called 'HostLibrary'.
Since these lib instances are only used from a host based test, can they be
moved into the 'Test' directory?
4. MdePkg/MdePkgTest.dsc.
* Can this DSC file be moved into the 'Test' directory?
* I see this DSC file only supports VS today. How much work is it to
add GCC support?
5. MdePkg/HostLibrary/BaseLibHost
* Why are there 2 INFs. One with ASM and one without ASM? Can we just
use the one with ASM and assume NASM is installed?
* I see the purpose of this lib instance is to call the
* SetJump()/LongJump(). So these implementations always work? It looks
like it assumes BASE_LIBRARY_JUMP_BUFFER is identical to the host OS user mode
application setjmp()/longjmp() state.
* Why are DRx and CRx registers emulated? I would think and code that
depends on read/writing these registers would not be compatible with host based
testing. Can we change to ASSERT (FALSE)?
* PatchInstructionX86() - I suspect this will not work in a host based
environment because it is self modifying code. Should it be ASSERT (FALSE)?
6. MdePkg/HostLibrary/DebugLibHost
* What is '#ifndef TEST_WITH_KLEE'
* What is the 'PatchFormat()' function? It is always disabled with if
(0).
* Are the PCDs to set the debug message levels disabled on purpose?
(DebugPrintEnabled(), DebugPrintLevelEnabled(), DebugCodeEnabled())
7. MdePkg/HostLibrary/BaseMemoryLibHost
* Why can't we use MdePkg/Library/BaseMemoryLib/BaseMemoryLib/inf
instead and reduce the number of host specific lib instances?
8. MdePkg/HostLibrary/MemoryAllocationLibHost
* Why is are memcpy(), assert(), memset() used in this lib? I would
expect this lib instance to match the UefiMemoryAllocationLib with the only the
use of malloc() and free() to replace the UEFI Boot Services calls.
9. Host library instance naming conventions.
* The current naming convention uses the environment as a prefix(e.g.
Pei, Smm, Uefi) and the services the lib instance uses as a post fix. Would it
make more sense to use 'Host' as a prefix instead of a postfix in the lib
instance names?
10. Unicode vs ASCII strings
* I see InitUnitTestFramework(), CreateUnitTestSuite(), and
AddTestCase() all take Unicode strings for the labels. I also see extra code
to convert gEfiCallerBaseName from ASCII to Unicode to use it as a short name
of a test framework. I think it would be simpler if the parameters to these
APIs were ASCII and the framework can convert to Unicode if needed.
11. Will InitUnitTestFramework() and CreateUnitTestSuite() always be called
in pairs? If so, can we combine these to a single API?
* I see the SafeIntLib example create a single framework and multiple
test suites. Perhaps we can have a single CreateUnitTestSuite() API where
Framework is an IN/OUT and if it is passed in as NULL, the Framework handle is
created.
* I see a pattern where the CreateUnitTestSuite() 'Package' parameter is
used as a prefix to every call to AddTestCase() in the 'ClassName' parameter.
Can we simplify AddTestCase() so it only need to pass in the name of the unit
test case, and the framework can append Package and the unit test case name?
12. I see the use of the 'Fw' variable as a shorthand for 'Framework'. Can
we use something other than 'Fw'. It may be confused with 'Firmware'.
13. UnitTestPkg/Include/UnitTestTypes.h
* I see several hard coded string lengths. Since this runs in a host
environment and strings can always be allocated, can the hard coded lengths be
removed? Update the structs to use pointers to strings instead of string
arrays, and the framework can manage alloc() and free()?
* How are Fingerprints used? The idea of using as hash as a unique
identifier is a good idea. How is the hash calculated? What unit test code
artifacts are used so developers know what parameters must be unique? Can we
just decide to use a specific hash algorithm/size and the structure can be a
pointer to an allocated buffer instead of a fixed size array to make it easy to
change the algorithm/size in the future?
* Update all the strings to be ASCII? See Unicode vs ASCII above.
* UNIT_TEST_SAVE_TEST - The last field is a variable sized array, so it
can be a formal field.
* UNIT_TEST_SAVE_CONTEXT - - The last field is a variable sized array,
so it can be a formal field.
* UNIT_TEST_SAVE_HEADER - Can the last 3 fields be changed to pointers
and be formal fields?
* Do the structures really need to be packed? Specially with the
changes suggested above? Is the intent to potentially share data stored on
disk between different host execution environments that may have different
width architectures?
14. UnitTestPkg - UnitTestLib.h
* Can you provide more context for the APIs SaveFrameworkState(),
SaveFrameworkStateAndQuit(), SaveFrameworkStateAndReboot(),
SetFrameworkBootNextDevice(). I do not see any Load() functions, so how would
a set of tests be resumed? If these do not apply to host based tests, should
these be split out to a different lib class?
15. UnitTestPkg/Library/UnitTestLib
* I see an implementation of MD5. We should not do our own. We should
use an approved implementation such as OpenSSL.
16. UnitTestPkg/Library/UnitTestTerminationLibTbd
* Do we really need this lib instance now?
Thanks,
Mike
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Bret Barkelew
via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 11:39 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: [edk2-devel] EDK2 Host-Based Unit Test RFC (Now with docs!)
Now that CI has landed in edk2/master, we'd like to get the basic framework for
unittesting staged as well. Target intercept date would be immediately after
the 2019/11 stabilization, so we wanted to go ahead and get comments now.
The host unittest framework consists of five primary pieces:
- The test library (Cmocka)
- Support libraries (Found in UnitTestPkg)
- The test support plugins (HostUnitTestComilerPlugin,
HostUnitTestDxeCompleteCheck, HostBasedUnitTestRunner)
- The configuration in the package-based *.ci.yaml file and package-based
Test.dsc
- The tests themselves
We have a demo branch set up at:
https://github.com/corthon/edk2-staging/tree/edk2-host-test_v2
We also have a demo build pipeline at:
https://dev.azure.com/tianocore/edk2-ci-play/_build?definitionId=36&_a=summary<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.azure.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2-ci-play%2F_build%3FdefinitionId%3D36%26_a%3Dsummary&data=02%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C3ce0b4eaf6d14de8822808d769f2c5fd%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637094365265670742&sdata=HFBmk%2FdB5pXI3exxB82pTS1oF877fLsrrdcirOzCCw0%3D&reserved=0>
The current demo branch contains a single test in MdePkg for SafeIntLib (module
file MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\TestBaseSafeIntLib.inf). This
test is automatically detected by the HostUnitTestComilerPlugin and run by the
HostBasedUnitTestRunner as part of the CI process.
A few notes about the current demo:
1) The demo currently only works on Windows build chains, but there's no reason
to believe that it can't work equally well on Linux build chains, and are happy
to work with anyone to get it there.
2) The demo currently has four failing conditions that can be seen towards the
end of MdePkg "Build and Test" log file for this build:
https://dev.azure.com/tianocore/edk2-ci-play/_build/results?buildId=2813<https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdev.azure.com%2Ftianocore%2Fedk2-ci-play%2F_build%2Fresults%3FbuildId%3D2590&data=02%7C01%7CBret.Barkelew%40microsoft.com%7C3ce0b4eaf6d14de8822808d769f2c5fd%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637094365265670742&sdata=HgPEoYg%2Fpx0fv4J5ULO1p0kvLfqcySkJHAYxp9GB598%3D&reserved=0>
"WARNING - Test SafeInt16ToChar8 - Status
d:\a\1\s\MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\TestBaseSafeIntLib.c:302:
error: Failure!
WARNING - TestBaseSafeIntLib.exe Test Failed
WARNING - Test SafeInt32ToChar8 - Status
d:\a\1\s\MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\TestBaseSafeIntLib.c:638:
error: Failure!
WARNING - TestBaseSafeIntLib.exe Test Failed
WARNING - Test SafeIntnToChar8 - Status
d:\a\1\s\MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\TestBaseSafeIntLib.c:1051:
error: Failure!
WARNING - TestBaseSafeIntLib.exe Test Failed
WARNING - Test SafeInt64ToChar8 - Status
d:\a\1\s\MdePkg\Test\UnitTest\Library\BaseSafeIntLib\TestBaseSafeIntLib.c:1456:
error: Failure!"
These failures seem to be legitimate and further work should be done by the
community to decide whether the test case is correct or the library is correct,
but one of them needs to change.
3) Current demo pulls in test collateral from a fork of the edk2-test repo.
This repo is currently *very* heavy due to the history of the UEFI SCT project
and the number of binaries that it pulls down. It's possible that we (the
community) need to select a better place for this code to live. Maybe in edk2
primary (though it's not explicitly firmware code, so it seems unnecessary).
Maybe in a new edk2-test2 repo or something like that.
There's an RFC doc here:
https://github.com/corthon/edk2-staging/blob/edk2-host-test_v2/Readme-RFC.md
And a usage guide here:
https://github.com/corthon/edk2-staging/blob/edk2-host-test_v2/UnitTestPkg/ReadMe.md
Once again, would love to get this into EDK2 master after stabilization, and
most of this has previously been shopped around in other discussion threads.
This is just where the rubber meets the road and is the minimal subset of code
that needs to land for folks to start contributing unittests against the core
libraries that can be run as part of any CI pass.
Thanks!
- Bret
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#51566): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/51566
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/61559421/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
