Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] guides: add a testing guide for developing tests

[Bruce Richardson <bruce.richardson@intel.com>]

On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 10:07:26AM +0100, David Marchand wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 3:56 PM Aaron Conole <aconole@redhat.com> wrote:
> > diff --git a/doc/guides/contributing/testing.rst b/doc/guides/contributing/testing.rst
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000000..86ca24ce43
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/doc/guides/contributing/testing.rst
> > @@ -0,0 +1,245 @@
> > +..  SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
> > +    Copyright 2018 The DPDK contributors
> 
> 2021?
> 
> > +
> > +.. _testing_guidelines:
> 
> I can't find a call to the testing_guidelines reference, so this can be removed.
> 
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > +The suites can be selected by adding the ``--suite`` option to the
> > +``meson test`` command.  Ex: ``meson test --suite fast-tests``::
> > +
> > +  $ meson test -C build --suite fast-tests
> > +  ninja: Entering directory `/home/aconole/git/dpdk/build'
> > +  [2543/2543] Linking target app/test/dpdk-test.
> > +  1/60 DPDK:fast-tests / acl_autotest          OK       3.17 s
> > +  2/60 DPDK:fast-tests / bitops_autotest       OK       0.22 s
> > +  3/60 DPDK:fast-tests / byteorder_autotest    OK       0.22 s
> > +  4/60 DPDK:fast-tests / cmdline_autotest      OK       0.28 s
> > +  5/60 DPDK:fast-tests / common_autotest       OK       0.57 s
> > +  6/60 DPDK:fast-tests / cpuflags_autotest     OK       0.27 s
> > +  ...
> 
> Trying this in my build env, I get all tests failing.
> This is because I run this as a normal user, but the system has
> hugepages configured.
> I figured this out quickly since I know the test framework (simply
> added a echo 0; exit at the top of has-hugepages.sh).
> But I am not sure a reader of this doc would be able to troubleshoot this.
> 
> Not sure if this is worth explaining here, or if we can enhance the
> hugepage check (permissions maybe?).
> 
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > +Checking code coverage
> > +----------------------
> > +The meson build system supports generating a code coverage report
> > +via the `-Db_coverage=true` option, in conjunction with a package
> > +like **lcov**, to generate an HTML code coverage report.  Example::
> > +
> > +  $ meson covered -Db_coverage=true
> 
> At first, I read "covered" as a meson command :-).
> I prefer an explicit "meson setup covered -Db_coverage=true", but well
> this is more a matter of taste.
> 
>

I also tend to prefer the build directory name at the end of the command,
so I'd suggest: "meson setup -Db_coverage=true covered".  Furthermore,
while I can understand the use of "covered" as a build directory name, I
think for consistency across all docs, we should just use "build" here as
the directory name, which again will reduce confusion.  "meson setup
-Db_coverage build"

/Bruce