From: agustin.benito@codethink.co.uk (Agustin Benito Bethencourt)
To: cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org
Subject: [cip-dev] LAVA health checks
Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2017 15:19:40 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <595CE76C.1040308@codethink.co.uk> (raw)
Hi,
one of the tasks that the CIP testing team has been performing since
before the B at D release is a daily LAVA health check using the CIP kernel
and BBB[2].
What is a health check?
According to LAVA documentation[1]...
"A health check is a special type of test job, designed to validate that
the a test device and the infrastructure around it are suitable for
running LAVA tests. Health checks jobs are run periodically to check for
equipment and/or infrastructure failures that may have happened. [...]"
So we are using this daily health check as "validation test" for B at D in
our default (for now) set up, that is B at D running on Linux + CIP kernel
+ BBB.
So on top of the testing that Ben H. does as maintainer, the CIP testing
team is booting the kernel on the BBB using B at D on daily basis. On the
positive side, this health check can be reproduced by others. But still
we are providing limited value since results are not shared.
Action 2 is the next milestone, in which we want to use B at D to test the
kernel (first, then a simple system) in a fully decentralised
environment (some would call it architecture).
The initial step is for B at D to be able to send mails (reports)
automatically to the cip-test-results mailing list. With this feature,
we could collaborate in ensuring the B at D is ready to test the CIP kernel
on complementary environments like:
* Using Renesas boards
* Running B at D on Windows10
on daily basis.
But sharing the results in the CIP context is far from enough. We need
to ensure transparently that any of us is:
1. using the same tests...
2. to test the same CIP system...
3. on the same boards...
4. with the same tool set...
5. under the same environment...
6. producing the same reports...
7. based on the same logs.
During our Thursday meetings (remember they are open so please join us)
we are starting to think about how we can use the health check concept
to "validate" points 2 to 5. This is a very interesting challenge that
we believe we can solve to great extend assuming a "fully distributed
testing service architecture"..
[1] https://validation.linaro.org/static/docs/v2/healthchecks.html
[2] BBB - BeagleBone Black
Best Regards
--
Agustin Benito Bethencourt
Principal Consultant - FOSS at Codethink
agustin.benito at codethink.co.uk
next reply other threads:[~2017-07-05 13:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-05 13:19 Agustin Benito Bethencourt [this message]
2017-07-05 14:24 ` [cip-dev] LAVA health checks Chris Paterson
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=595CE76C.1040308@codethink.co.uk \
--to=agustin.benito@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=cip-dev@lists.cip-project.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox