From: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linusa@google.com, calvinwan@google.com,
phillip.wood123@gmail.com, gitster@pobox.com,
rsbecker@nexbridge.com
Subject: [PATCH v6 0/3] Add unit test framework and project plan MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 16:50:04 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cover.1692229626.git.steadmon@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0169ce6fb9ccafc089b74ae406db0d1a8ff8ac65.1688165272.git.steadmon@google.com>
In our current testing environment, we spend a significant amount of
effort crafting end-to-end tests for error conditions that could easily
be captured by unit tests (or we simply forgo some hard-to-setup and
rare error conditions). Unit tests additionally provide stability to the
codebase and can simplify debugging through isolation. Turning parts of
Git into libraries[1] gives us the ability to run unit tests on the
libraries and to write unit tests in C. Writing unit tests in pure C,
rather than with our current shell/test-tool helper setup, simplifies
test setup, simplifies passing data around (no shell-isms required), and
reduces testing runtime by not spawning a separate process for every
test invocation.
This series begins with a project document covering our goals for adding
unit tests and a discussion of alternative frameworks considered, as
well as the features used to evaluate them. A rendered preview of this
doc can be found at [2]. It also adds Phillip Wood's TAP implemenation
(with some slightly re-worked Makefile rules) and a sample strbuf unit
test. Finally, we modify the configs for GitHub and Cirrus CI to run the
unit tests. Sample runs showing successful CI runs can be found at [3],
[4], and [5].
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAJoAoZ=Cig_kLocxKGax31sU7Xe4==BGzC__Bg2_pr7krNq6MA@mail.gmail.com/
[2] https://github.com/steadmon/git/blob/unit-tests-asciidoc/Documentation/technical/unit-tests.adoc
[3] https://github.com/steadmon/git/actions/runs/5884659246/job/15959781385#step:4:1803
[4] https://github.com/steadmon/git/actions/runs/5884659246/job/15959938401#step:5:186
[5] https://cirrus-ci.com/task/6126304366428160 (unrelated tests failed,
but note that t-strbuf ran successfully)
In addition to reviewing the patches in this series, reviewers can help
this series progress by chiming in on these remaining TODOs:
- Figure out how to ensure tests run on additional OSes such as NonStop
- Figure out if we should collect unit tests statistics similar to the
"counts" files for shell tests
- Decide if it's OK to wait on sharding unit tests across "sliced" CI
instances
- Provide guidelines for writing new unit tests
Changes in v6:
- Officially recommend using Phillip Wood's TAP framework
- Add an example strbuf unit test using the TAP framework as well as
Makefile integration
- Run unit tests in CI
Changes in v5:
- Add comparison point "License".
- Discuss feature priorities
- Drop frameworks:
- Incompatible licenses: libtap, cmocka
- Missing source: MyTAP
- No TAP support: µnit, cmockery, cmockery2, Unity, minunit, CUnit
- Drop comparison point "Coverage reports": this can generally be
handled by tools such as `gcov` regardless of the framework used.
- Drop comparison point "Inline tests": there didn't seem to be
strong interest from reviewers for this feature.
- Drop comparison point "Scheduling / re-running": this was not
supported by any of the main contenders, and is generally better
handled by the harness rather than framework.
- Drop comparison point "Lazy test planning": this was supported by
all frameworks that provide TAP output.
Changes in v4:
- Add link anchors for the framework comparison dimensions
- Explain "Partial" results for each dimension
- Use consistent dimension names in the section headers and comparison
tables
- Add "Project KLOC", "Adoption", and "Inline tests" dimensions
- Fill in a few of the missing entries in the comparison table
Changes in v3:
- Expand the doc with discussion of desired features and a WIP
comparison.
- Drop all implementation patches until a framework is selected.
- Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230517-unit-tests-v2-v2-0-21b5b60f4b32@google.com
Josh Steadmon (2):
unit tests: Add a project plan document
ci: run unit tests in CI
Phillip Wood (1):
unit tests: add TAP unit test framework
.cirrus.yml | 2 +-
Documentation/Makefile | 1 +
Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt | 220 +++++++++++++++++
Makefile | 24 +-
ci/run-build-and-tests.sh | 2 +
ci/run-test-slice.sh | 5 +
t/Makefile | 15 +-
t/t0080-unit-test-output.sh | 58 +++++
t/unit-tests/.gitignore | 2 +
t/unit-tests/t-basic.c | 95 +++++++
t/unit-tests/t-strbuf.c | 75 ++++++
t/unit-tests/test-lib.c | 329 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
t/unit-tests/test-lib.h | 143 +++++++++++
13 files changed, 966 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt
create mode 100755 t/t0080-unit-test-output.sh
create mode 100644 t/unit-tests/.gitignore
create mode 100644 t/unit-tests/t-basic.c
create mode 100644 t/unit-tests/t-strbuf.c
create mode 100644 t/unit-tests/test-lib.c
create mode 100644 t/unit-tests/test-lib.h
Range-diff against v5:
1: c7dca1a805 ! 1: 81c5148a12 unit tests: Add a project plan document
@@ Commit message
preliminary comparison of several different frameworks.
- Coauthored-by: Calvin Wan <calvinwan@google.com>
+ Co-authored-by: Calvin Wan <calvinwan@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Calvin Wan <calvinwan@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+
+== Choosing a framework
+
-+=== Desired features & feature priority
++We believe the best option is to implement a custom TAP framework for the Git
++project. We use a version of the framework originally proposed in
++https://lore.kernel.org/git/c902a166-98ce-afba-93f2-ea6027557176@gmail.com/[1].
++
++
++== Choosing a test harness
++
++During upstream discussion, it was occasionally noted that `prove` provides many
++convenient features, such as scheduling slower tests first, or re-running
++previously failed tests.
++
++While we already support the use of `prove` as a test harness for the shell
++tests, it is not strictly required. The t/Makefile allows running shell tests
++directly (though with interleaved output if parallelism is enabled). Git
++developers who wish to use `prove` as a more advanced harness can do so by
++setting DEFAULT_TEST_TARGET=prove in their config.mak.
++
++We will follow a similar approach for unit tests: by default the test
++executables will be run directly from the t/Makefile, but `prove` can be
++configured with DEFAULT_UNIT_TEST_TARGET=prove.
++
++
++== Framework selection
+
+There are a variety of features we can use to rank the candidate frameworks, and
+those features have different priorities:
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+** <<adoption,Adoption>>
+
+[[license]]
-+==== License
++=== License
+
+We must be able to legally use the framework in connection with Git. As Git is
+licensed only under GPLv2, we must eliminate any LGPLv3, GPLv3, or Apache 2.0
+projects.
+
+[[vendorable-or-ubiquitous]]
-+==== Vendorable or ubiquitous
++=== Vendorable or ubiquitous
+
+We want to avoid forcing Git developers to install new tools just to run unit
+tests. Any prospective frameworks and harnesses must either be vendorable
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+tools installed already.
+
+[[maintainable-extensible]]
-+==== Maintainable / extensible
++=== Maintainable / extensible
+
+It is unlikely that any pre-existing project perfectly fits our needs, so any
+project we select will need to be actively maintained and open to accepting
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+conditions holds.
+
+[[major-platform-support]]
-+==== Major platform support
++=== Major platform support
+
+At a bare minimum, unit-testing must work on Linux, MacOS, and Windows.
+
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+more platforms, but it is still usable in principle.
+
+[[tap-support]]
-+==== TAP support
++=== TAP support
+
+The https://testanything.org/[Test Anything Protocol] is a text-based interface
+that allows tests to communicate with a test harness. It is already used by
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+further.
+
+[[diagnostic-output]]
-+==== Diagnostic output
++=== Diagnostic output
+
+When a test case fails, the framework must generate enough diagnostic output to
+help developers find the appropriate test case in source code in order to debug
+the failure.
+
+[[runtime-skippable-tests]]
-+==== Runtime-skippable tests
++=== Runtime-skippable tests
+
+Test authors may wish to skip certain test cases based on runtime circumstances,
+so the framework should support this.
+
+[[parallel-execution]]
-+==== Parallel execution
++=== Parallel execution
+
+Ideally, we will build up a significant collection of unit test cases, most
+likely split across multiple executables. It will be necessary to run these
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+parallelism can be handled by the test harness.
+
+[[mock-support]]
-+==== Mock support
++=== Mock support
+
+Unit test authors may wish to test code that interacts with objects that may be
+inconvenient to handle in a test (e.g. interacting with a network service).
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+for more convenient tests.
+
+[[signal-error-handling]]
-+==== Signal & error handling
++=== Signal & error handling
+
+The test framework should fail gracefully when test cases are themselves buggy
+or when they are interrupted by signals during runtime.
+
+[[project-kloc]]
-+==== Project KLOC
++=== Project KLOC
+
+The size of the project, in thousands of lines of code as measured by
+https://dwheeler.com/sloccount/[sloccount] (rounded up to the next multiple of
+1,000). As a tie-breaker, we probably prefer a project with fewer LOC.
+
+[[adoption]]
-+==== Adoption
++=== Adoption
+
+As a tie-breaker, we prefer a more widely-used project. We use the number of
+GitHub / GitLab stars to estimate this.
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+https://libcheck.github.io/check/[Check],[lime-background]#LGPL v2.1#,[red-background]#False#,[yellow-background]#Partial#,[lime-background]#True#,[lime-background]#True#,[lime-background]#True#,[red-background]#False#,[red-background]#False#,[red-background]#False#,[lime-background]#True#,17,973
+|=====
+
-+==== Alternatives considered
++=== Additional framework candidates
+
+Several suggested frameworks have been eliminated from consideration:
+
@@ Documentation/technical/unit-tests.txt (new)
+** https://github.com/siu/minunit[minunit]
+** https://cunit.sourceforge.net/[CUnit]
+
-+==== Suggested framework
-+
-+Considering the feature priorities and comparison listed above, a custom
-+framework seems to be the best option.
-+
-+
-+== Choosing a test harness
-+
-+During upstream discussion, it was occasionally noted that `prove` provides many
-+convenient features. While we already support the use of `prove` as a test
-+harness for the shell tests, it is not strictly required.
-+
-+IMPORTANT: It is an open question whether or not we wish to rely on `prove` as a
-+strict dependency for running unit tests.
-+
+
+== Milestones
+
-+* Get upstream agreement on implementing a custom test framework
-+* Determine if it's OK to rely on `prove` for running unit tests
+* Add useful tests of library-like code
-+* Integrate with Makefile
-+* Integrate with CI
+* Integrate with
+ https://lore.kernel.org/git/20230502211454.1673000-1-calvinwan@google.com/[stdlib
+ work]
-: ---------- > 2: ca284c575e unit tests: add TAP unit test framework
-: ---------- > 3: ea33518d00 ci: run unit tests in CI
base-commit: a9e066fa63149291a55f383cfa113d8bdbdaa6b3
--
2.41.0.694.ge786442a9b-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-16 23:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 67+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20230517-unit-tests-v2-v2-0-8c1b50f75811@google.com>
2023-06-30 22:51 ` [PATCH v4] unit tests: Add a project plan document Josh Steadmon
2023-07-01 0:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-07-01 1:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-07 23:07 ` [PATCH v5] " Josh Steadmon
2023-08-14 13:29 ` Phillip Wood
2023-08-15 22:55 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-08-17 9:05 ` Phillip Wood
2023-08-16 23:50 ` Josh Steadmon [this message]
2023-08-16 23:50 ` [PATCH v6 1/3] " Josh Steadmon
2023-08-16 23:50 ` [PATCH v6 2/3] unit tests: add TAP unit test framework Josh Steadmon
2023-08-17 0:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-17 0:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-08-17 18:34 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-08-16 23:50 ` [PATCH v6 3/3] ci: run unit tests in CI Josh Steadmon
2023-08-17 18:37 ` [PATCH v7 0/3] Add unit test framework and project plan Josh Steadmon
2023-08-17 18:37 ` [PATCH v7 1/3] unit tests: Add a project plan document Josh Steadmon
2023-08-17 18:37 ` [PATCH v7 2/3] unit tests: add TAP unit test framework Josh Steadmon
2023-08-18 0:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-22 20:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-09-24 13:57 ` phillip.wood123
2023-09-25 18:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-06 22:58 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-10-09 17:37 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-08-17 18:37 ` [PATCH v7 3/3] ci: run unit tests in CI Josh Steadmon
2023-08-17 20:38 ` [PATCH v7 0/3] Add unit test framework and project plan Junio C Hamano
2023-08-24 20:11 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-09-13 18:14 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-09 22:21 ` [PATCH v8 " Josh Steadmon
2023-10-09 22:21 ` [PATCH v8 1/3] unit tests: Add a project plan document Josh Steadmon
2023-10-10 8:57 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-10-11 21:14 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-10-11 23:05 ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-11-01 17:31 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-10-27 20:12 ` Christian Couder
2023-11-01 17:47 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-11-01 23:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-09 22:21 ` [PATCH v8 2/3] unit tests: add TAP unit test framework Josh Steadmon
2023-10-11 21:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-16 13:43 ` [PATCH v8 2.5/3] fixup! " Phillip Wood
2023-10-16 16:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-11-01 17:54 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-11-01 23:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-11-01 17:54 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-11-01 23:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-10-27 20:15 ` [PATCH v8 2/3] " Christian Couder
2023-11-01 22:54 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-10-09 22:21 ` [PATCH v8 3/3] ci: run unit tests in CI Josh Steadmon
2023-10-09 23:50 ` [PATCH v8 0/3] Add unit test framework and project plan Junio C Hamano
2023-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH 0/3] CMake unit test fixups Phillip Wood
2023-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH 1/3] fixup! cmake: also build unit tests Phillip Wood
2023-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH 2/3] fixup! artifacts-tar: when including `.dll` files, don't forget the unit-tests Phillip Wood
2023-10-19 15:21 ` [PATCH 3/3] fixup! cmake: handle also unit tests Phillip Wood
2023-10-19 19:19 ` [PATCH 0/3] CMake unit test fixups Junio C Hamano
2023-10-16 10:07 ` [PATCH v8 0/3] Add unit test framework and project plan phillip.wood123
2023-11-01 23:09 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-10-27 20:26 ` Christian Couder
2023-11-01 23:31 ` [PATCH v9 " Josh Steadmon
2023-11-01 23:31 ` [PATCH v9 1/3] unit tests: Add a project plan document Josh Steadmon
2023-11-01 23:31 ` [PATCH v9 2/3] unit tests: add TAP unit test framework Josh Steadmon
2023-11-03 21:54 ` Christian Couder
2023-11-09 17:51 ` Josh Steadmon
2023-11-01 23:31 ` [PATCH v9 3/3] ci: run unit tests in CI Josh Steadmon
2023-11-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v10 0/3] Add unit test framework and project plan Josh Steadmon
2023-11-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v10 1/3] unit tests: Add a project plan document Josh Steadmon
2023-11-09 23:15 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-11-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v10 2/3] unit tests: add TAP unit test framework Josh Steadmon
2023-11-09 18:50 ` [PATCH v10 3/3] ci: run unit tests in CI Josh Steadmon
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=cover.1692229626.git.steadmon@google.com \
--to=steadmon@google.com \
--cc=calvinwan@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=linusa@google.com \
--cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
--cc=rsbecker@nexbridge.com \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).