Re: [XEN PATCH 5/9] CI: Have the gitlab job fail on tools/tests failure

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 03/06/2025 2:44 pm, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 02:41:50PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
>> On 03/06/2025 1:42 pm, Anthony PERARD wrote:
>>> From: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>>
>>> We can't rely on an exit value from `run-tools-tests` since we only
>>> have the console output. `console.exp` only look for success or it
>>> times out. We could parse the console output, but the junit is more
>>> concise. Also check if we have it or fail as well.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Anthony PERARD <anthony.perard@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  automation/scripts/qubes-x86-64.sh | 7 +++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/automation/scripts/qubes-x86-64.sh 
>>> b/automation/scripts/qubes-x86-64.sh
>>> index 046137a4a6..7a4c5ae489 100755
>>> --- a/automation/scripts/qubes-x86-64.sh
>>> +++ b/automation/scripts/qubes-x86-64.sh
>>> @@ -298,6 +298,13 @@ TEST_RESULT=$?
>>>  
>>>  if [ -n "$retrieve_xml" ]; then
>>>      nc -w 10 "$SUT_ADDR" 8080 > tests-junit.xml </dev/null
>>> +    # Findout if one of the test failed
>>> +    if ! grep -q '</testsuites>' tests-junit.xml; then
>>> +        echo "ERROR: tests-junit.xml is incomplete or missing."
>>> +        TEST_RESULT=1
>>> +    elif grep -q '</failure>' tests-junit.xml; then
>>> +        TEST_RESULT=1
>>> +    fi
>>>  fi
>>>  
>>>  exit "$TEST_RESULT"
>> A couple of things.
>>
>> From my experimentation with junit,
>> https://gitlab.com/xen-project/hardware/xen-staging/-/pipelines/1849342222/test_report?job_name=kbl-xtf-x86-64-gcc-debug
>> we can also use </error> for classification.  I'm also very disappointed
>> in Gitlab classifying <warning> as success.
>>
>> Not for this patch, but for XTF I need to be able to express "tolerable
>> failure".  (All branches of Xen will run the same tests, and we don't
>> have OSSTest to deem "fail never passed" as non-blocking.)
>>
>> Even if the job passes overall, I want tolerable failures to show up in
>> the UI, so I have to use <failure> in junit.xml.  But that means needing
>> to be more selective, and I don't have a good idea of how to do this. 
>> (I have one terrible idea, which is </failure type=tolerable"> which
>> will escape that grep, but it feels like (ab)buse of XML.)
> But that automation/ dir (including the run-tools-tests script) is
> per-branch, so you can specify there which tests should be considered
> failure and which just warning, no? It will require few more bits in the
> script, but fundamentally shouldn't be a problem?
>

XTF is in a separate repo and does not have branches.

Now consider
https://xenbits.xen.org/gitweb/?p=xen.git;a=commitdiff;h=d965e2ee07c56c341d8896852550914d87ea5374,
and testing it.

Anything I put into XTF to test it will pass on staging but fail on the
older stable-* trees.  In due course it will get backported to the
bugfix branches, but it likely won't get fixed on the security-only
branches.

Furthermore, I need to not change xen.git to make this work, and older
branches need to pick up newer XTF automatically.  (XSA tests *are*
expected to pass everywhere once the issue is public.)

My current plan is to have logic of the form:

if ( xenver >= $STAGING )
    xtf_failure(...);
else
    xtf_success("Expected Failure:" ...);

where $STAGING moves when backports get done.  I still want the failures
to show up in the Tests UI.

~Andrew