[Fuego] Status of LTP parser - populating run.json
daniel.sangorrin at toshiba.co.jp
Thu Aug 10 00:48:51 UTC 2017
Sorry for the late reply.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bird, Timothy [mailto:Tim.Bird at sony.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, August 09, 2017 1:12 PM
> To: Daniel Sangorrin; fuego at lists.linuxfoundation.org
> Subject: Status of LTP parser - populating run.json
> I've been doing some testing with LTP and the new parser. I'm only seeing one result show up
> in the run.json file. This is due to a bug in the process_data routine. When I made it backwards
> compatible with the other functional tests, I broke it for LTP.
Don't worry, it was broken already by my changes and waiting for an upgrade.
> I think it would be better to move to the LTP parser.py program calling plib.process(), rather than
> process_data. Currently, only old-style functional tests call that routine, with a single value
> provided by generic-parser.py, and old-style benchmark tests, with values that can be made
> into measurements.
> I changed where the results are saved. They were being pulled from the board into the
> build directory, which seems not right. I changed fuego_test.sh to fetch them into the
> log_directory, and process them there.
> I also added the "quickhit" test, which does a small set of syscalls. This was an existing
> test scenario in LTP, that is useful for doing a quick test. However, I had to change
> the code which prunes the syscall test programs from the deploy directory. There were
> other LTP tests, such as ltplite, and stress, that also referenced syscalls binaries.
> The code to remove the syscalls needed to recognize these tests and not do the pruning
> for them also.
> This is in the last few commits to my 'next' branch, if you want to take a look.
> Let me know if you have any questions. Sorry for breaking the LTP parser, but I hope to
> have it fixed by tomorrow.
Thanks for the fixes.
Now that the parser seems to work for many tests, it would be good to upgrade the LTP to support
the new parser natively. The script already uses "test_category" which will become "test_set" and
"test_case" which has a direct equivalent. I hope it will not be too much work.
More information about the Fuego