Add app integeration test #23
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #23 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 27.10% 27.08% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 81 81
Lines 6837 6844 +7
==========================================
+ Hits 1853 1854 +1
- Misses 4800 4806 +6
Partials 184 184
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
msherif1234
force-pushed
the
add-app-intg-test
branch
3 times, most recently
from
d1abc8f
to
86fa441
Compare
msherif1234
force-pushed
the
add-app-intg-test
branch
4 times, most recently
from
eb8b8d2
to
262dc24
Compare
test/integration/common.go
Outdated
| func doKprobeCheck(t *testing.T, output *bytes.Buffer) bool { | ||
| str := `Kprobe count: ([0-9]+)` | ||
| if ok, count := doProbeCommonCheck(t, output, str); ok { | ||
| t.Logf("counted %d application executions so far, BPF program is functioning", count) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| t.Logf("counted %d application executions so far, BPF program is functioning", count) | |
| t.Logf("counted %d kprobe executions so far, BPF program is functioning", count) |
test/integration/common.go
Outdated
| func doAppKprobeCheck(t *testing.T, output *bytes.Buffer) bool { | ||
| str := `Kprobe: count: ([0-9]+)` | ||
| if ok, count := doProbeCommonCheck(t, output, str); ok { | ||
| t.Logf("counted %d application executions so far, BPF program is functioning", count) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| t.Logf("counted %d application executions so far, BPF program is functioning", count) | |
| t.Logf("counted %d kprobe executions so far, BPF program is functioning", count) |
| return false | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func doAppKprobeCheck(t *testing.T, output *bytes.Buffer) bool { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is just an observation, but I changed the logs for the application example so they had a similar format and it was more clear to me that all the code was running. As a result we need separate checks here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm just seeing kprobe, tracepoint and uprobe logs in the test output:
=== RUN TestApplicationGoCounter
app_test.go:26: deploying target required for uprobe counter program if its not already deployed
app_test.go:29: waiting for go target userspace daemon to be available
app_test.go:38: deploying application counter program
app_test.go:45: waiting for go application counter userspace daemon to be available
common.go:28: counted 139291 application executions so far, BPF program is functioning
common.go:73: counted 3 SIGUSR1 signals so far, BPF program is functioning
common.go:91: counted 12 uprobe executions so far, BPF program is functioning
--- PASS: TestApplicationGoCounter (46.87s)
What happened to the TC and XDP checks?
|
I see what's happening. The kprobe, tracepoint and uprobe checks have a log, but the TC and XDP checks don't. However, the other tests also dump the log, so you can still tell that it's functioning when looking at the test log. I think it would be good to have "BPF program is functioning" logs for TC and XDP too. |
|
|
||
| func doTcCheck(t *testing.T, output *bytes.Buffer) bool { | ||
| if strings.Contains(output.String(), "packets received") && strings.Contains(output.String(), "bytes received") { | ||
| return true |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Add a "BPF program is functioning" log for the TC and XDP checks as is done for the other types.
|
I have a few minor requests for some log changes, but otherwise, this looks good to me. Thanks! |
msherif1234
force-pushed
the
add-app-intg-test
branch
from
262dc24
to
82cb08f
Compare
Signed-off-by: Mohamed Mahmoud <[email protected]>
msherif1234
force-pushed
the
add-app-intg-test
branch
from
82cb08f
to
40f93c8
Compare
fix catalog for ocp4.17
depends on
#6
bpfman/bpfman#1154