Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] test/py: Create tests for ext4 and fat testing on sandbox
On Donnerstag, 5. Januar 2017 17:15:02 CET you wrote:
> On 01/01/2017 02:48 PM, Stefan Bruens wrote:
> > On Montag, 12. Dezember 2016 11:04:34 CET you wrote:
> >> On 12/04/2016 05:52 PM, Stefan Brüns wrote:
> >>> From: Stefan Brüns
> >>>
> >>> The following checks are currently implemented:
> >>> 1. listing a directory
> >>> 2. verifying size of a file
> >>> 3. veryfying md5sum for a file region
> >>> 4. reading the beginning of a file
> >>
> >> 2) Doesn't mounting/unmounting require root? Nothing else in test/py
> >> does. It'd be useful to put a comment at the top of the file detailing
> >> which command one might want to add to /etc/sudoers to avoid having to
> >> run the whole thing as root, and use sudo within the test where
> >> necessary.
> >
> > It already uses sudo, the run command is visible from the log. Currently,
> > I
> > just run "sudo true" prior to executing the test, the password is cached
> > for 5 minutes.
>
> I don't see sudo used anywhere in test/py; can you point out where you
> see it using sudo at present?
it == the fs test
> >>> +class FsImage:
> >> ...
> >>
> >>> +def mount(self, log):
> >>> +if not os.path.exists(self.mountpath):
> >>> +os.mkdir(self.mountpath)
> >>
> >> Use os.makedirs(path) instead; you can avoid the if statement, and it'll
> >> handle parent directories too.
> >
> > exist_ok only exists in python >= 3.2.
>
> There's no need to use exist_ok; do this (example from conftest.py):
>
> try:
> os.makedirs(path)
> except OSError as exc:
> if exc.errno == errno.EEXIST and os.path.isdir(path):
> pass
> else:
> raise
Thats not what you wrote. You said "you can avoid the if statement". What you
meant is "you can replace the single line if statement with a 6 line exception
handling statement". The latter is *only* better iff you have to handle
concurrent creation of the wanted directory.
> >>> +@pytest.fixture(scope='module', params=['fat', 'ext4'])
> >>> +def fsimage(prereq_commands, u_boot_config, u_boot_log, request):
> >>> +"""Filesystem image instance."""
> >>> +datadir = u_boot_config.result_dir + '/'
> >>
> >> Wouldn't it be better to put this into
> >> u_boot_config.persistent_data_dir, plus avoid creating the image file if
> >> it already exists? See u_boot_utils.py's PersistentRandomFile() as an
> >> example. I wonder if that could be expanded to create files not just of
> >> size n, but with sparse layout specs like this test uses?
> >
> > See above. I don't think PersistentRandomFile() does fit here, as the
> > files
> > are created *inside* an image. Maybe it could be used after the image and
> > filesystem is created and mounted ...
>
> You missed my point. PersistentRandomFile() is existing code that
> creates a persistent data file. You can create a new function/... that
> uses the same techniques to create the data file, but make it create a
> filesystem image rather than random data.
The disk image is a fixture, so it should be created as a fixture. The usage
of PersistentRandomFile as currently done is wrong, it is a prerequisite of
the test, not part of the test itself.
The correct use of PersistentRandomFile might be as a helper function used by
different fixtures.
1. persistent_data_dir may be the better choice, but only if the image is
created as a template there and then copied to a different location for each
test run - the idea is to modify the image by write tests, and a clean image
is needed here. Feel free to implement this yourself.
2. PersistentRandomFile creates single files, the only parameter is the size
(although extending it to sparse files is quite possible). Disk images with
filesystems have a lot more parameters - filesystem itself, filesystem
options, filesystem contents.
Actually you missed my point here - PersistentRandomFile() is existing code,
but it is useless here. Shoehorning it in here or extending it until it suits
is a bad idea. It does one thing, and it does it fine. Creation of disk images
is a different thing it does and should not do.
> >>> +fstype = request.param
> >>> +imagepath = datadir + '3GB.' + fstype + '.img'
> >>> +mountpath = datadir + 'mnt_' + fstype
> >>> +
> >>> +with u_boot_log.section('Create image "{0}"'.format(imagepath)):
> >>> +fsimage = FsImage(fstype, imagepath, mountpath)
> >>> +fsimage.mkfs(u_boot_log)
> >>> +
> >>> +yield fsimage
> >>> +fsimage.unmount(u_boot_log)
> >>
> >> Unmounting seems to happen in a lot of different places. Can we isolate
> >> it to just one place?
> >
> > The image is mounted/unmounted for two different reasons -
> > creating/populating the image, and when accessing it using the hostfs
> > commands.
>
> IIRC, there's more duplication than that, but I'll look again when this
> is reposted.
>
> >> Also, what happens if the code throws an exception after obtaining an
> >> fsimage from this generat
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] test/py: Create tests for ext4 and fat testing on sandbox
On 01/01/2017 02:48 PM, Stefan Bruens wrote:
On Montag, 12. Dezember 2016 11:04:34 CET you wrote:
On 12/04/2016 05:52 PM, Stefan Brüns wrote:
From: Stefan Brüns
The following checks are currently implemented:
1. listing a directory
2. verifying size of a file
3. veryfying md5sum for a file region
4. reading the beginning of a file
2) Doesn't mounting/unmounting require root? Nothing else in test/py
does. It'd be useful to put a comment at the top of the file detailing
which command one might want to add to /etc/sudoers to avoid having to
run the whole thing as root, and use sudo within the test where necessary.
It already uses sudo, the run command is visible from the log. Currently, I
just run "sudo true" prior to executing the test, the password is cached for 5
minutes.
I don't see sudo used anywhere in test/py; can you point out where you
see it using sudo at present?
+class FsImage:
...
+def mount(self, log):
+if not os.path.exists(self.mountpath):
+os.mkdir(self.mountpath)
Use os.makedirs(path) instead; you can avoid the if statement, and it'll
handle parent directories too.
exist_ok only exists in python >= 3.2.
There's no need to use exist_ok; do this (example from conftest.py):
try:
os.makedirs(path)
except OSError as exc:
if exc.errno == errno.EEXIST and os.path.isdir(path):
pass
else:
raise
+@pytest.fixture(scope='module', params=['fat', 'ext4'])
+def fsimage(prereq_commands, u_boot_config, u_boot_log, request):
+"""Filesystem image instance."""
+datadir = u_boot_config.result_dir + '/'
Wouldn't it be better to put this into
u_boot_config.persistent_data_dir, plus avoid creating the image file if
it already exists? See u_boot_utils.py's PersistentRandomFile() as an
example. I wonder if that could be expanded to create files not just of
size n, but with sparse layout specs like this test uses?
See above. I don't think PersistentRandomFile() does fit here, as the files
are created *inside* an image. Maybe it could be used after the image and
filesystem is created and mounted ...
You missed my point. PersistentRandomFile() is existing code that
creates a persistent data file. You can create a new function/... that
uses the same techniques to create the data file, but make it create a
filesystem image rather than random data.
+fstype = request.param
+imagepath = datadir + '3GB.' + fstype + '.img'
+mountpath = datadir + 'mnt_' + fstype
+
+with u_boot_log.section('Create image "{0}"'.format(imagepath)):
+fsimage = FsImage(fstype, imagepath, mountpath)
+fsimage.mkfs(u_boot_log)
+
+yield fsimage
+fsimage.unmount(u_boot_log)
Unmounting seems to happen in a lot of different places. Can we isolate
it to just one place?
The image is mounted/unmounted for two different reasons - creating/populating
the image, and when accessing it using the hostfs commands.
IIRC, there's more duplication than that, but I'll look again when this
is reposted.
Also, what happens if the code throws an exception after obtaining an
fsimage from this generator; I'm not sure that any cleanup happens in
that case. Should there be "try: ... finally: unmount()" somewhere to
clean up even in the case of an error? Alternatively, perhaps class
FsImage should have a destructor that does the unmount (at least if it
hasn't happened already)?
Its a fixture and will be torn down by pytest.
How does that work? Once the fixture function has yielded the image,
surely if an exception is thrown, it'll be "thrown through" the
generator function and hence prevent the rest of the function body from
running? Or is there some special magic that lets the generator
complete, even if the yield effectively threw an exception?
+return output[1:3]
No error checking for output[0]? I suppose if u_boot_console_base.py's
bad_pattern_defs[] included error patterns that "readcmd" was expected
to emit, that'd be fine, but it doesn't currently. Maybe we expect that
the other command can't possibly succeed if the read doesn't. Similar
comment for run_sizecmd() below, and perhaps elsewhere.
filesize is only set if the read succeeds, and "env print filesize" matches
bad_pattern_defs in case of an error.
What pattern is printed that matches bad_pattern_defs? Nothing in
bad_pattern_defs obviously would get printed if $filesize wasn't set.
Also, what if $filesize is still set from an earlier test (e.g. in a
different Python file), and a later test fails, yet this isn't detected
since that relies on $filesize not being set? I see this script doing
"env set filesize" /after/ its own tests which should prevent this, but
not /before/ the first test.
___
U-Boot mailing list
U-Boot@lists.denx.de
http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] test/py: Create tests for ext4 and fat testing on sandbox
On Montag, 12. Dezember 2016 11:04:34 CET you wrote:
> On 12/04/2016 05:52 PM, Stefan Brüns wrote:
> > From: Stefan Brüns
> >
> > The following checks are currently implemented:
> > 1. listing a directory
> > 2. verifying size of a file
> > 3. veryfying md5sum for a file region
> > 4. reading the beginning of a file
>
> General comments:
>
> 1) I don't see anywhere that limits this test to sandbox. I assume it
> can't run on non-sandbox targets, even when using the U-Boot native
> filesystem commands, since there's no logic here to transfer the
> filesystem images to the target device.
I have added Sandbox only for next patch version.
Running it from qemu should not be to difficult, "transferring" should be
possible by adding the image to the qemu command.
Ideally, the FS image would be created once and then be reused. This had
several benefits:
1. Reducing time for creation of the FAT image(s). Creation of the 2.5GB test
file is time consuming, as FAT has no sparse files. Storage requirement is
quite low if the FAT image is "resparsed" e.g. using "copy --sparse=always".
2. Sudo would be only (mostly) needed for the initial image creation.
3. If the image were created from a template, write tests (to be added later)
could always start with a pristine image.
> I think this issue blocks checking in this change as-is, although all
> the other comments below can likely be deferred until later if you want,
> perhaps with the exception of (2) immediately below?
>
> 2) Doesn't mounting/unmounting require root? Nothing else in test/py
> does. It'd be useful to put a comment at the top of the file detailing
> which command one might want to add to /etc/sudoers to avoid having to
> run the whole thing as root, and use sudo within the test where necessary.
It already uses sudo, the run command is visible from the log. Currently, I
just run "sudo true" prior to executing the test, the password is cached for 5
minutes.
If the image were created once, there would be no need for sudo for later runs
(save hostfs).
> > diff --git a/test/py/tests/test_fs.py b/test/py/tests/test_fs.py
> >
> > +from distutils.spawn import find_executable
>
> Is distutils part of the standard library, i.e. in a default install? If
> not, please add it to the requirements section of test/py/README.md.
Don't know for other distros, for openSUSE it is.
> > +"""
> > +Scenarios:
> > +hostfs: access image contents through the sandbox hostfs
> > +facility, using the filesytem implementation of
> > +the sandbox host, e.g. Linux kernel
> > +generic: test u-boots native filesystem implementations,
> > +using the 'generic' command names, e.g. 'load'
> > +TODO -
> > +fscommands: test u-boots native filesystem implementations,
> > +using the fs specific commands, e.g. 'ext4load'
> > +"""
> > +@pytest.fixture(scope='class', params=['generic', 'hostfs'])
>
> > +def scenario(request):
> Shouldn't that docstring be the first "statement" of the function, not
> right before it? I can't remember if Python picks up docstrings from
> right before objects too. If not, perhaps a comment would be better
> rather than a string.
For attributes, the docstring should be in front of the initial assignment,
and may be picked up by the doc generator. For functions, it should be the
first line(s) of the function.
> > +class FsImage:
> ...
>
> > +def mount(self, log):
> > +if not os.path.exists(self.mountpath):
> > +os.mkdir(self.mountpath)
>
> Use os.makedirs(path) instead; you can avoid the if statement, and it'll
> handle parent directories too.
exist_ok only exists in python >= 3.2.
> > +@pytest.fixture(scope='module', params=['fat', 'ext4'])
> > +def fsimage(prereq_commands, u_boot_config, u_boot_log, request):
> > +"""Filesystem image instance."""
> > +datadir = u_boot_config.result_dir + '/'
>
> Wouldn't it be better to put this into
> u_boot_config.persistent_data_dir, plus avoid creating the image file if
> it already exists? See u_boot_utils.py's PersistentRandomFile() as an
> example. I wonder if that could be expanded to create files not just of
> size n, but with sparse layout specs like this test uses?
See above. I don't think PersistentRandomFile() does fit here, as the files
are created *inside* an image. Maybe it could be used after the image and
filesystem is created and mounted ...
> > +fstype = request.param
> > +imagepath = datadir + '3GB.' + fstype + '.img'
> > +mountpath = datadir + 'mnt_' + fstype
> > +
> > +with u_boot_log.section('Create image "{0}"'.format(imagepath)):
> > +fsimage = FsImage(fstype, imagepath, mountpath)
> > +fsimage.mkfs(u_boot_log)
> > +
> > +yield fsimage
> > +fsimage.unmount(u_boot_log)
>
> Unmounting seems to happen in a lot of different places. Can we isolate
> it to just one place?
The image is mounted/unmounted for two different reasons - creating/populating
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] test/py: Create tests for ext4 and fat testing on sandbox
On 12/04/2016 05:52 PM, Stefan Brüns wrote:
From: Stefan Brüns
The following checks are currently implemented:
1. listing a directory
2. verifying size of a file
3. veryfying md5sum for a file region
4. reading the beginning of a file
General comments:
1) I don't see anywhere that limits this test to sandbox. I assume it
can't run on non-sandbox targets, even when using the U-Boot native
filesystem commands, since there's no logic here to transfer the
filesystem images to the target device.
I think this issue blocks checking in this change as-is, although all
the other comments below can likely be deferred until later if you want,
perhaps with the exception of (2) immediately below?
2) Doesn't mounting/unmounting require root? Nothing else in test/py
does. It'd be useful to put a comment at the top of the file detailing
which command one might want to add to /etc/sudoers to avoid having to
run the whole thing as root, and use sudo within the test where necessary.
diff --git a/test/py/tests/test_fs.py b/test/py/tests/test_fs.py
+from distutils.spawn import find_executable
Is distutils part of the standard library, i.e. in a default install? If
not, please add it to the requirements section of test/py/README.md.
+"""
+Scenarios:
+hostfs: access image contents through the sandbox hostfs
+facility, using the filesytem implementation of
+the sandbox host, e.g. Linux kernel
+generic: test u-boots native filesystem implementations,
+using the 'generic' command names, e.g. 'load'
+TODO -
+fscommands: test u-boots native filesystem implementations,
+using the fs specific commands, e.g. 'ext4load'
+"""
+@pytest.fixture(scope='class', params=['generic', 'hostfs'])
+def scenario(request):
Shouldn't that docstring be the first "statement" of the function, not
right before it? I can't remember if Python picks up docstrings from
right before objects too. If not, perhaps a comment would be better
rather than a string.
+class FsImage:
...
+def mount(self, log):
+if not os.path.exists(self.mountpath):
+os.mkdir(self.mountpath)
Use os.makedirs(path) instead; you can avoid the if statement, and it'll
handle parent directories too.
+@pytest.fixture(scope='module', params=['fat', 'ext4'])
+def fsimage(prereq_commands, u_boot_config, u_boot_log, request):
+"""Filesystem image instance."""
+datadir = u_boot_config.result_dir + '/'
Wouldn't it be better to put this into
u_boot_config.persistent_data_dir, plus avoid creating the image file if
it already exists? See u_boot_utils.py's PersistentRandomFile() as an
example. I wonder if that could be expanded to create files not just of
size n, but with sparse layout specs like this test uses?
+fstype = request.param
+imagepath = datadir + '3GB.' + fstype + '.img'
+mountpath = datadir + 'mnt_' + fstype
+
+with u_boot_log.section('Create image "{0}"'.format(imagepath)):
+fsimage = FsImage(fstype, imagepath, mountpath)
+fsimage.mkfs(u_boot_log)
+
+yield fsimage
+fsimage.unmount(u_boot_log)
Unmounting seems to happen in a lot of different places. Can we isolate
it to just one place?
Also, what happens if the code throws an exception after obtaining an
fsimage from this generator; I'm not sure that any cleanup happens in
that case. Should there be "try: ... finally: unmount()" somewhere to
clean up even in the case of an error? Alternatively, perhaps class
FsImage should have a destructor that does the unmount (at least if it
hasn't happened already)?
+
+
+def test_fs_prepare_image(u_boot_config, fsimage, request):
Nit: Two blank lines there.
+"""Dummy test to create an image file with filesystem.
+Useful to isolate fixture setup from actual tests."""
+if not fsimage:
+pytest.fail('Failed to create image')
+
+def test_fs_populate_image(populated_image, request):
+"""Dummy test to create initial filesystem contents."""
+if not populated_image:
+pytest.fail('Failed create initial image content')
Why not just fail (or raise an exception) right where the error occurs?
+def run_readcmd(self, filename, offset, length):
+"""Run the scenario and filesystem specific read command
+for the given file."""
+cmd = '{0}{1} {2} {3} {4} 0x{5:x} 0x{6:x}'.format(
+self.fs_params.get('prefix'),
+self.fs_commands.get('readcmd'),
+self.fs_params.get('interface'),
+'0', # address
It might be a good idea to invoke
u_boot_utils.find_ram_base(u_boot_console) rather than hard-coding an
address of 0. I don't know if sandbox will ever change its memory
layout, but if there's any chance any of this will be ported to real HW,
that function will be required.
+self.image.rootpath + filename,
+length, offset)
+with self.console.log.section('Read file "{0}"'.format(filename)):
+
Re: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] test/py: Create tests for ext4 and fat testing on sandbox
On 4 December 2016 at 19:52, Stefan Brüns wrote: > From: Stefan Brüns > > The following checks are currently implemented: > 1. listing a directory > 2. verifying size of a file > 3. veryfying md5sum for a file region > 4. reading the beginning of a file > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Brüns > --- > test/py/tests/test_fs.py | 357 > +++ > 1 file changed, 357 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 test/py/tests/test_fs.py Reviewed-by: Simon Glass Great to get this conversion going, thanks! ___ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/mailman/listinfo/u-boot
[U-Boot] [PATCH v2 2/2] test/py: Create tests for ext4 and fat testing on sandbox
From: Stefan Brüns
The following checks are currently implemented:
1. listing a directory
2. verifying size of a file
3. veryfying md5sum for a file region
4. reading the beginning of a file
Signed-off-by: Stefan Brüns
---
test/py/tests/test_fs.py | 357 +++
1 file changed, 357 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 test/py/tests/test_fs.py
diff --git a/test/py/tests/test_fs.py b/test/py/tests/test_fs.py
new file mode 100644
index 00..7aaf8debaf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/py/tests/test_fs.py
@@ -0,0 +1,357 @@
+# Copyright (c) 2016, Stefan Bruens
+#
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+# Test U-Boot's filesystem implementations
+#
+# The tests are currently covering the ext4 and fat filesystem implementations.
+#
+# Following functionality is currently checked:
+# - Listing a directory and checking for a set of files
+# - Verifying the size of a file
+# - Reading sparse and non-sparse files
+# - File content verification using md5sums
+
+
+from distutils.spawn import find_executable
+import hashlib
+import pytest
+import os
+import random
+import re
+import u_boot_utils as util
+
+@pytest.fixture(scope='session')
+def prereq_commands():
+"""Detect required commands to run file system tests."""
+for command in ['mkfs', 'mount', 'umount']:
+if find_executable(command) is None:
+pytest.skip('Filesystem tests, "{0}" not in PATH'.format(command))
+
+"""
+Scenarios:
+hostfs: access image contents through the sandbox hostfs
+facility, using the filesytem implementation of
+the sandbox host, e.g. Linux kernel
+generic: test u-boots native filesystem implementations,
+using the 'generic' command names, e.g. 'load'
+TODO -
+fscommands: test u-boots native filesystem implementations,
+using the fs specific commands, e.g. 'ext4load'
+"""
+@pytest.fixture(scope='class', params=['generic', 'hostfs'])
+def scenario(request):
+request.cls.scenario = request.param
+return request.param
+
+
+"""
+Dictionary of files to use during filesystem tests. The files
+are keyed by the filenames. The value is an array of strides, each tuple
+contains the the start offset (inclusive) and end offset (exclusive).
+"""
+files = {
+'empty.file' : [(0, 0)],
+'1MB.file' : [(0, 1e6)],
+'1MB.sparse.file' : [(1e6-1, 1e6)],
+'32MB.sparse.file' : [(0, 1e6), (4e6, 5e6), (31e6, 32e6)],
+# Creating a 2.5 GB file on FAT is exceptionally slow, disable it for now
+# '2_5GB.sparse.file' : [(0, 1e6), (1e9, 1e9+1e6), (2.5e9-1e6, 2.5e9)],
+}
+
+"""Options to pass to mkfs."""
+mkfs_opts = {
+ 'fat' :'-t vfat',
+ 'ext4' : '-t ext4 -F',
+}
+
+class FsImage:
+def __init__(self, fstype, imagepath, mountpath):
+"""Create a new filesystem image.
+
+Args:
+fstype: filesystem type (string)
+imagepath: full path to image file
+mountpath: mountpoint directory
+"""
+self.fstype = fstype
+self.imagepath = imagepath
+self.mountpath = mountpath
+self.md5s = {}
+with open(self.imagepath, 'w') as fd:
+fd.truncate(0)
+fd.seek(3e9)
+fd.write(bytes([0]))
+
+def mkfs(self, log):
+mkfsopts = mkfs_opts.get(self.fstype)
+util.run_and_log(log,
+'mkfs {0} {1}'.format(mkfsopts, self.imagepath))
+
+def create_file(self, log, filename, strides):
+"""Create a single file in the filesystem. Each file
+is defined by one or more strides, which is filled with
+random data. For each stride, the md5sum is calculated
+and stored.
+"""
+md5sums = []
+with open(self.mountpath + '/' + filename, 'w') as fd:
+for stride in strides:
+length = int(stride[1] - stride[0])
+data = bytearray(random.getrandbits(8) for _ in xrange(length))
+md5 = hashlib.md5(data).hexdigest()
+md5sums.append(md5)
+log.info('{0}: write {1} bytes @ {2} : {3}'.format(
+filename, int(stride[1] - stride[0]),
+int(stride[0]), md5))
+fd.seek(stride[0])
+fd.write(data);
+self.md5s[filename] = md5sums
+
+def create_files(self, log):
+with log.section('Create initial files'):
+for filename in files:
+self.create_file(log, filename, files[filename])
+log.info('Created test files in "{0}"'.format(self.mountpath))
+util.run_and_log(log, 'ls -la {0}'.format(self.mountpath))
+util.run_and_log(log, 'sync {0}'.format(self.mountpath))
+
+def mount(self, log):
+if not os.path.exists(self.mountpath):
+os.mkdir(self.mountpath)
+log.info('Mounting {0} at {1}'.format(self.imagepath, self.mountpath))
+if self.fstype == 'ext4':
+cmd = 'sudo -n mo
