Hi Jair, Thanks to let us know the background of the ticket.
I see some good feedback from people mentioned they are working on similar solutions and should come out soon. We will continuously work on this ticket. Regards, -Yang (Young) -----Original Message----- From: Gonzalez Plascencia, Jair De Jesus [mailto:jair.de.jesus.gonzalez.plascen...@intel.com] Sent: August-23-18 11:42 To: Wang, Yang (Young); Nicolas Dechesne; MacLeod, Randy Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer; richard.pur...@intel.com; Anibal Limon Subject: RE: [OE-core] [RFC] Yocto Project Bug 12372 - Automate the execution of pTest with LAVA Hi Yang, I'm no longer working as part of the Yocto Project QA team since last year, so I haven't been following the current status of its CI and infrastructure. However, I would like to clarify the main intention with the original ticket was to track the task to automate the execution of pTest, using a public tool that could handle the hardware configuration steps and allowing to integrate them into the public Yocto Project's CI loop, while also allowing YP users to replicate the infrastructure for their internal platforms if they required it. At the moment I created the ticket, the YP team's consensus was to use LAVA as the tool for this task due to its features, public availability and usage across the industry, but the implementation and integration details with OEQA and Autobuilder were still being defined. Also, as far as I know, at least initially we would maintain our own LAVA infrastructure and device types separately from Linaro's board farm. However, after stating this, I'd suggest the current team to decide the best path to follow either by using the LAVA system or using a different framework/system altogether that allows to fulfill the previously stated objectives. -- Jair > -----Original Message----- > From: yang.w...@windriver.com [mailto:yang.w...@windriver.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 10:44 AM > To: Nicolas Dechesne <nicolas.deche...@linaro.org>; > randy.macl...@windriver.com > Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer <openembedded- > c...@lists.openembedded.org>; richard.pur...@intel.com; Gonzalez > Plascencia, Jair De Jesus <jair.de.jesus.gonzalez.plascen...@intel.com>; > Anibal > Limon <anibal.li...@linaro.org> > Subject: Re: [OE-core] [RFC] Yocto Project Bug 12372 - Automate the execution > of pTest with LAVA > > On 18-08-22 02:51 AM, Nicolas Dechesne wrote: > > > hi, > > > > On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:25 AM Randy MacLeod > > <randy.macl...@windriver.com> wrote: > >> On 08/21/2018 11:04 AM, Wang, Yang (Young) wrote: > >>> Hi All, > >>> > >>> I'm working on this ticket: > >>> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12372 > >> Thanks for investigating the bug/enhancement and posting your thoughts. > >> I'm jumping in without much expertise to try to get the ball rolling. > >> > >>> As far as I know, the following are all true nowadays: > >>> - Ptest needs to be run on real hardware and it takes few hours to > >>> finish > >>> - Ptest can be run within OEQA, it can also be run independently > >>> - LAVA is a good open source test framework which: > >>> - can manage both real hardware and different kinds of simulators as > >>> the > test devices > >>> - provides well managed logging system and test reports > >>> > >>> How to automatically run Ptest? I think running it with LAVA is a good > solution, but ... > >>> > >>> LAVA is running as a server which can manage test jobs submitted to it, > >>> here > is a typical LAVA job: > >>> https://staging.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/231942/definitio > >>> n As you can see, it defines the device type, test images which will > >>> used, the test cases and a lot of others. > >> That's a good clear format. > >> > >> I believe that what people are thinking is that we'd have: > >> > >> device_type: x86 > >> > >> job_name: x86_64 oeqa > >> ... > >> > >> actions: > >> - deploy: > >> ... > >> > >> - boot: > >> ... > >> > >> - test: > >> timeout: > >> minutes: 2 > >> definitions: > >> << some thing that makes the target and lava server wait for > >> oeqa to run >> > >> name: oeqa-test > >> > >>> So the typical automatic way to run a test through LAVA is to write a > >>> script > which use a LAVA job template, replace images with the expected ones, and > then submit it to LAVA though a command, for example: > >>> $ lava-tool submit-job http://<user>@<lava-server> x86_64_ > >>> job_oeqa-ptest.yaml > > This is more or less something that we are doing as part of our CI > > loop. The process is the following: > > > > 1. fetch layers updates > > 2. make a new build for one or more $MACHINE 3. use LAVA job template > > to generate an actual LAVA job 4. run this LAVA job on the Linaro LAVA > > Board farm > > > > There is no integration into oe-core / bitbake, it is run outside of > > the OE builds. > This is clear, the test automation through LAVA needs to be done outside of > OE. > > You can check our ptest LAVA job from our most recent build: > > https://validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/1890442 > > > > The generated LAVA job is: > > https://validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/1890442/definition > > > > The job deals with all the flashing/management of the device to test > > (a dragonboard 820c in this specific example), so there is a bit of > > boiler plate , but the base template for running ptest can be found > > here: > > > > https://git.linaro.org/ci/job/configs.git/tree/lt-qcom/lava-job-defini > > tions/boards/template-ptest.yaml > > > > which itself points the the LAVA job definition for ptest: > > > > https://git.linaro.org/qa/test-definitions.git/tree/automated/linux/pt > > est > > > > This is where LAVA communicates and manages how to run ptests and get > > status from each test. > > > > And finally... you can view the test results for this ptest run in LAVA: > > > > https://validation.linaro.org/results/1890442/0_linux-ptest > My private test automation framework is doing the similar job on daily basis. > > So there are some preconditions of doing test automation through LAVA > publicly: > 1. Select a public LAVA server with an accessible account 2. Exactly know > which > type of hardware we would like to use, and that has to be set in the LAVA job > - It doesn't need to set a specific board since LAVA supports > device-types, for > example: > https://validation.linaro.org/scheduler/device_types > 3. Devices under this specific device-type need to be maintained by someone, > if > they don't work, our tests will fail all the time > > So, go back to the original ticket, we can definitely create some scripts to > run > Ptest automatically through LAVA, but specific settings of LAVA server and > device-type have to be there as well. I'm concerned if this is what the ticket > reporter would like to get. > > Thanks, > -Yang Wang > >> That would still work given the above oeqa job. > >> > >> No doubt there's additional glue code that would be nice to write > >> that would allow automatically creating the lava yaml that boots the > >> system into a state where oeqa code takes over. > > I think most of what needs to be created is there in all the links I > > shared above. This is what we came up with , and it is not integrated > > with oeqa. But this can be used as a baseline at least. > > > >> I've never used it and only just found the code but I bet that adding > >> another controller to: > >> > >> git://git.yoctoproject.org/meta-yocto > >> > >> $ ls meta-yocto-bsp/lib/oeqa/controllers/ > >> beaglebonetarget.py edgeroutertarget.py grubtarget.py __init__.py > >> > >> is what would make sense. > >> > >>> This command will return a job id (take #231942 as an example), and then > the script can get all logs and reports based on LAVA server address and this > job > id, for example: > >>> - execution log: > >>> https://staging.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/231942 > >>> - test report: > >>> https://staging.validation.linaro.org/results/231942/0_smoke-tests > >> Suspect that this is were the design intent diverges. > >> > >> Usually lava runs the whole system, and I think we just want it to > >> manage the hardware and then step out of the way. > >> There'd likely be an api to allow oeqa and lava to communicate so > >> that for example oeqa could tell lava that the tests were done. > > Yes, LAVA runs the whole system. Including management of devices to > > test, reboot, flashing.. It also has a LAVA test definition format > > that must be used. So to benefit from LAVA, a LAVA instance must be > > setup, and then we need to have lab instances where boards are > > attached to. A LAVA instance can have several labs, and labs can be > > spread physically. LAVA must know how to deal with each > > hardware/machine (e.g. how to power it on, get a serial console). The > > linux rootfs can be flashed into onboard memory, or NFS can be used as > > well. That is left to the JOB writer. > > > >> All lava would know is that an oeqa test ran and it's completion > >> status. > >> > >>> So, as far as I can tell, it may not be an appropriate way to integrate > >>> LAVA > test into a bitbake command as we run it with simple test harness, LAVA is an > advanced test framework and it manages all jobs submit to it well. > >>> > >>> Please comment if you have better idea about this ticket. > >> I'm really going on a few conversations that I've had or chats on IRC > >> so hopefully someone else can step up and comment on both Young's > >> initial email and my interpretation of where we're trying to get to. > >> > >> Thanks, > >> > >> -- > >> # Randy MacLeod > >> # Wind River Linux > >> -- > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Openembedded-core mailing list > >> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org > >> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core -- _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
