Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

e2e: fuzz topology-aware #621

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 23, 2021
Merged

e2e: fuzz topology-aware #621

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 23, 2021

Conversation

askervin
Copy link
Contributor

@askervin askervin commented Feb 9, 2021

No description provided.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Feb 9, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #621 (4c42d5f) into master (d62a007) will increase coverage by 2.96%.
The diff coverage is 77.21%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #621      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   36.27%   39.23%   +2.96%     
==========================================
  Files          52       52              
  Lines        6388     6943     +555     
==========================================
+ Hits         2317     2724     +407     
- Misses       3831     3954     +123     
- Partials      240      265      +25     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...manager/policy/builtin/topology-aware/resources.go 66.04% <74.64%> (+8.07%) ⬆️
...urce-manager/policy/builtin/topology-aware/node.go 51.37% <100.00%> (+0.14%) ⬆️
...rce-manager/policy/builtin/topology-aware/pools.go 61.18% <100.00%> (+0.46%) ⬆️
...rce-manager/policy/builtin/topology-aware/cache.go 37.77% <0.00%> (+1.17%) ⬆️
pkg/dump/dump.go 60.81% <0.00%> (+4.47%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update d62a007...4c42d5f. Read the comment docs.

@klihub
Copy link
Contributor

klihub commented Feb 10, 2021

That looks really nice !

I was trying to hack together something very similar using pure bash with random-generated sequence of actions of start, stop, restart, sleep N, fail C, exit C, and check (start/stop/restart the pod, sleep for N, stop container C with a simulated failure/success (exit 1/exit 0), checking actual vs. expected state). Instead of signals I was controlling the containers with a per-pod-per-container hostPath mounted /ctrl/ctrl file system entry which was read with a tail -F loop for commands (exit, fail)...

But I'll abort that exercise, this looks so much better, especially I imagine the verification part should be easier.

@askervin askervin force-pushed the 5B7_fuzz branch 7 times, most recently from 0607ee9 to a053158 Compare February 16, 2021 09:19
@askervin askervin force-pushed the 5B7_fuzz branch 2 times, most recently from 899eef5 to d134ad8 Compare February 22, 2021 16:45
@askervin askervin marked this pull request as ready for review February 22, 2021 16:45
@askervin
Copy link
Contributor Author

  • Removed generated test code.
  • Added big fat warning on skipping the test when generated tests are not found.
  • Added help on generating tests.
  • Added help on building fMBT (test generator) docker image if not found.
  • Production Dockerfiles (fmbt-gui and fmbt-cli) added to fMBT devel branch for more decently sized images (0.4 GB vs 0.8 GB vs. 2.5 GB)

Copy link
Contributor

@klihub klihub left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@klihub klihub merged commit 90ac6a2 into intel:master Feb 23, 2021
@klihub klihub linked an issue Feb 23, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request
@klihub klihub mentioned this pull request Oct 5, 2021
25 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Validation: add reliability / fuzzing tests
3 participants