Hi,
currently many tests use this code in its test objects:
raise error.TestFail -or- raise error.TestWarn
to end a test that "failed" (from our perspective). It then creates a few ugly exceptions in the output, see here, even if everything went just fine (from autotest perspective):
http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/results/250-autotest/qa03.c.fedoraproject.or...
and finally it reports:
09/08 12:48:13 INFO | job:1254| FAIL rpmlint rpmlint timestamp=1283950093 localtime=Sep 08 12:48:13 09/08 12:48:13 INFO | job:1254| END FAIL rpmlint rpmlint timestamp=1283950093 localtime=Sep 08 12:48:13
(which is also visible in autotest web frontend).
However, since we now use jskladan's patchset defining AutoQATest parent class (using self.result variable), I no longer see a reason to raise those exceptions. Quite the contrary. Those exception don't even match our result states, which we have a much richer set (passed, failed, info, aborted, crashed and maybe some other).
I'd like to propose that we stop using those autotest-internal TestFail and TestWarn exceptions.
What will change: 1. We no longer see red/purple boxes in autotest frontend. 2. The AutoQATest parent class will be adjusted to automatically output the test result after a test has finished. 3. Tests will just need to store proper result in self.result variable, that's all. The methods may be then ended in a standard manner (return or no statement).
What will be the benefits: 1. We will know that if we see a traceback it's a problem. We won't have to examine in detail whether this traceback is "good" or "bad". 2. It will allow us to report any crashed test object (throwing an exception) to the mailing list. We have already started to do that and it's great: https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-results/2010-September/thread.html But currently it works only for those tests that haven't filled self.result before the crash occurred. We need to catch all exceptions.
What do you think?
Hi,
I'd support this changes - seems reasonable to me, especially once we'll use resultsdb.
At the moment, the ExceptionCatcher decorator only sets the self.result to CRASHED, if the variable is still unset - because of the error.Test{Fail,Warn} exceptions being thrown when the test 'fails'.
If we omit these, every exception thrown will then represent an error (as Kamil mentioned), and we'll be able to go through the 'CRASHED' tests with more ease.
Joza ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kamil Paral" kparal@redhat.com To: "List for development discussion of the AutoQA project" autoqa-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org Sent: Wednesday, September 8, 2010 1:41:09 PM GMT +01:00 Amsterdam / Berlin / Bern / Rome / Stockholm / Vienna Subject: proposal: deprecate using raise error.TestFail
Hi,
currently many tests use this code in its test objects:
raise error.TestFail -or- raise error.TestWarn
to end a test that "failed" (from our perspective). It then creates a few ugly exceptions in the output, see here, even if everything went just fine (from autotest perspective):
http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/results/250-autotest/qa03.c.fedoraproject.or...
and finally it reports:
09/08 12:48:13 INFO | job:1254| FAIL rpmlint rpmlint timestamp=1283950093 localtime=Sep 08 12:48:13 09/08 12:48:13 INFO | job:1254| END FAIL rpmlint rpmlint timestamp=1283950093 localtime=Sep 08 12:48:13
(which is also visible in autotest web frontend).
However, since we now use jskladan's patchset defining AutoQATest parent class (using self.result variable), I no longer see a reason to raise those exceptions. Quite the contrary. Those exception don't even match our result states, which we have a much richer set (passed, failed, info, aborted, crashed and maybe some other).
I'd like to propose that we stop using those autotest-internal TestFail and TestWarn exceptions.
What will change: 1. We no longer see red/purple boxes in autotest frontend. 2. The AutoQATest parent class will be adjusted to automatically output the test result after a test has finished. 3. Tests will just need to store proper result in self.result variable, that's all. The methods may be then ended in a standard manner (return or no statement).
What will be the benefits: 1. We will know that if we see a traceback it's a problem. We won't have to examine in detail whether this traceback is "good" or "bad". 2. It will allow us to report any crashed test object (throwing an exception) to the mailing list. We have already started to do that and it's great: https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-results/2010-September/thread.html But currently it works only for those tests that haven't filled self.result before the crash occurred. We need to catch all exceptions.
What do you think? _______________________________________________ autoqa-devel mailing list autoqa-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/autoqa-devel
On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 07:41 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
Hi,
currently many tests use this code in its test objects:
raise error.TestFail -or- raise error.TestWarn
to end a test that "failed" (from our perspective). It then creates a few ugly exceptions in the output, see here, even if everything went just fine (from autotest perspective):
http://autoqa.fedoraproject.org/results/250-autotest/qa03.c.fedoraproject.or...
and finally it reports:
09/08 12:48:13 INFO | job:1254| FAIL rpmlint rpmlint timestamp=1283950093 localtime=Sep 08 12:48:13 09/08 12:48:13 INFO | job:1254| END FAIL rpmlint rpmlint timestamp=1283950093 localtime=Sep 08 12:48:13
(which is also visible in autotest web frontend).
However, since we now use jskladan's patchset defining AutoQATest parent class (using self.result variable), I no longer see a reason to raise those exceptions. Quite the contrary. Those exception don't even match our result states, which we have a much richer set (passed, failed, info, aborted, crashed and maybe some other).
I'd like to propose that we stop using those autotest-internal TestFail and TestWarn exceptions.
What will change:
- We no longer see red/purple boxes in autotest frontend.
Hah, I was thinking the same thing when inspecting the autotest tko results viewer. It's hard to distinguish between a successful test run that found problems, vs a test case failure.
- The AutoQATest parent class will be adjusted to automatically output
the test result after a test has finished. 3. Tests will just need to store proper result in self.result variable, that's all. The methods may be then ended in a standard manner (return or no statement).
What will be the benefits:
- We will know that if we see a traceback it's a problem. We won't have to
examine in detail whether this traceback is "good" or "bad".
+1 agreed
- It will allow us to report any crashed test object (throwing an exception)
to the mailing list. We have already started to do that and it's great: https://fedorahosted.org/pipermail/autoqa-results/2010-September/thread.html But currently it works only for those tests that haven't filled self.result before the crash occurred. We need to catch all exceptions.
What do you think?
This is a good improvement, thanks for taking the time to propose.
Thanks, James
On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 15:03 -0400, James Laska wrote:
On Wed, 2010-09-08 at 07:41 -0400, Kamil Paral wrote:
I'd like to propose that we stop using those autotest-internal TestFail and TestWarn exceptions.
What will change:
- We no longer see red/purple boxes in autotest frontend.
Hah, I was thinking the same thing when inspecting the autotest tko results viewer. It's hard to distinguish between a successful test run that found problems, vs a test case failure.
Yeah - I think this would clean things up significantly for us, and is therefore a pretty great idea.
But I wish I knew why the autotest developers originally decided to use these exceptions rather than return values from the tests - surely there was some good reason for that design, and I'd like to know what we're losing by discarding it.
-w
autoqa-devel@lists.fedorahosted.org
-
James Laska -
Josef Skladanka -
Kamil Paral -
Will Woods