Re: [Qemu-devel] gtester questions/issues

[Anthony Liguori <aliguori@us.ibm.com>]

On 06/09/2011 01:47 PM, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>
> I've started writing some tests with the glib test framework (used by the qapi
> patches) but am facing some issues that doesn't seem to exist with check (our
> current framework).
>
> Of course that it's possible that I'm missing something, in this case pointers
> are welcome, but I must admit that my first impression wasn't positive.
>
> 1. Catching test abortion
>
> By default check runs each test on a separate process, this way it's able to
> catch any kind of abortion (such as an invalid pointer deference) and it
> prints a very developer friendly message:
>
>   Running suite(s): Memory module test suite
>   0%: Checks: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 1
>   check-memory.c:20:E:Memory API:test_read_write_byte_simple:33: (after this point) Received signal 11 (Segmentation fault)
>
> The glib suite doesn't seem to do that, at least not by default, so this is
> what you get on an invalid pointer:
>
>   ~/src/qmp-unstable/build (qapi-review)/ ./test-visiter2
>   /qapi/visitor/input/int: Segmentation fault (core dumped)
>   ~/src/qmp-unstable/build (qapi-review)/
>
> Is it possible to have check's functionality someway? I read about the
> g_test_trap_fork() function, but one would have to use it manually in
> each test case, this is a no-no.

I think this is a personal preference thing.  I think having fork() be 
optional is great because it makes it easier to use common state for 
multiple test cases.

>
> 2. Memory leaks
>
> If you write something as simple as:
>
> int main(int argc, char **argv)
> {
>      g_test_init(&argc,&argv, NULL);
>      return g_test_run();
> }
>
> And run it under valgrind, you'll see this leaks memory. If you add
> tests cases to it you'll see that it floods memory. This makes it almost
> impossible to debug memory leaks.
>
> Is there a cleanup function I'm missing? I googled for it, but I found only
> other people complaining about this too :(

My version of glib/valgrind doesn't have this problem.  Maybe there's a 
valgrind filter for gtester on ubuntu and not fedora?

>
> Now, let me say that this will also happen with check if you it in fork mode
> (which is the default). However, the leak goes away when you run it in
> non-fork mode which is what you want to do if you want to do any kind of debug
> with check (having the bug is still not acceptable though, but the fact is that
> it won't bite you in practice).
>
> 3. Test output
>
> The default output I get when I run a gtester test is:
>
>   ~/src/qmp-unstable/build (qapi-review)/ ./test-visiter2
>   /qapi/visitor/input/int: OK
>   /qapi/visitor/input/str: OK
>   ~/src/qmp-unstable/build (qapi-review)/
>
> Which is probably ok for a small amount of tests. However, you don't want to
> look for a list of 10 or more lines to see if a test failed, you want something
> more obvious, like what check does:
>
>   ~/src/qmp-unstable/build (qapi-review)/ ./check-qint
>   Running suite(s): QInt test-suite
>   100%: Checks: 5, Failures: 0, Errors: 0
>   ~/src/qmp-unstable/build (qapi-review)/
>
> Now, I read about the gtester program and the gtester-report and I can understand
> the wonders of a xml + html report (like having on the web page, etc) but running
> two programs and transforming xml is not what developers want to do when they're
> running unit-tests every few minutes (not to mention that I'm getting all kinds of
> crashes when I run gtester-report in fedora).

I actually like the way gtester does it and the html output is quite 
nice IMHO.

But the main motivator between gtester is that it's there.  It can be a 
non-optional build dependency.  libcheck cannot because it's not widely 
available/used.  It's also much harder to use libcheck since you have to 
create a test hierarchy programmatically.

The check tests have bit rotted over time to the point that they're 
broken in the tree.  I attribute this to the fact that they aren't built 
by default.

Regards,

Anthony Liguori

> Ah, I just found out that check also has xml support but I've never
> used it...