From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C587FC433ED for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 13:07:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44EC1613D0 for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 13:07:13 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 44EC1613D0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linaro.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Received: from localhost ([::1]:45686 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lk4rw-0005L9-9q for qemu-devel@archiver.kernel.org; Fri, 21 May 2021 09:07:12 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55560) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lk4ph-0002FA-9H for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 May 2021 09:04:54 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x336.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::336]:44763) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lk4pc-0001DG-LB for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 21 May 2021 09:04:53 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-x336.google.com with SMTP id y184-20020a1ce1c10000b02901769b409001so7142314wmg.3 for ; Fri, 21 May 2021 06:04:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:date:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=g57KhzZBSlYRTmOkMp+nOCdcA09SLubqwK6n8L6rTno=; b=oMxVWRnHsftfd9ETEA+trGE8N5QxU/nTsWGQkJWYVYGuQVe+60w0SIxszHDwbNggSo mcJCz3sZp5wPhRgDDIwgx5IylXog/NxvvTFE/4X7ujpG7XWUNXVFUJOvrAtJWKT8KU3o 7Q2vdhRq+CgXrZHqUlg9LwO64xE55RqWE01EkvRJR7vtQHaO0ly9A66bIZySBYgcPhQj MqZOfMvHzjLJC8YaUOlarXzwZOq9zCSBbe+n0mX37/pD+PRcHMqkDfL7iN62Hcy4dJUl PeCUsBxD14HhlJ+V5KkZ1WZW4skTeSSmPUmKn0ooeE0KEhcAW9Aftc4NRJGkNz1IAXbv 443A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:date :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=g57KhzZBSlYRTmOkMp+nOCdcA09SLubqwK6n8L6rTno=; b=UOqHytWg9qqGjqLbiJkqbWYdnZk0ZkJuzddk0fkbneQ5eBhQGZuzN/feWGe/afsyGe QyXR+9kc4vEh4ssWZYFRu+scF0hVzBnKgwa4gQKfiuKGyGAoP5JzSwr5wr7fMTtO07/q /t5VOpiCnn32m0mGT2jtlN6Tt2u/HCvehBkk48E82QISutibBv7HvWiztCnxsllFB3Oo Pq5Qvua8KEm8XuDmeXXkMMu01j/ivXcFvh+mVdXpS8C+ryJ9RRrRLJ0Meox+m5XQZ55U c7cDaCEFhR8EbPr9UQ+Q7hL5DM25G2Stv4saKXzb9fFEH/tZVjr7tD53jU1c2JJU8Rzf AgPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531PaxrLrloa3x63QolBxIsXmo58rpflw79wAbBpUh6MOZGbW79A pVe5OneJoIU2PrJzKUI45rWgyQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxg4NPW/y5xfM8BzKeShxvRODahwgg3UThoZ6OsEdLOQuYBLXBhdRpWuzoy1RRYncg2DHZp9Q== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:2155:: with SMTP id h82mr8794474wmh.115.1621602286239; Fri, 21 May 2021 06:04:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zen.linaroharston ([51.148.130.216]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a11sm2028749wrr.48.2021.05.21.06.04.45 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 21 May 2021 06:04:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zen (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zen.linaroharston (Postfix) with ESMTP id A257A1FF7E; Fri, 21 May 2021 14:04:44 +0100 (BST) References: <20210520195322.205691-1-willianr@redhat.com> <20210520195322.205691-2-willianr@redhat.com> <0f4a1c6c-ddba-ae57-2d55-f59c478dc9c5@redhat.com> <943fcdae-168a-adf8-c82b-b1a88369441c@redhat.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.5.13; emacs 28.0.50 From: Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= To: Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= Subject: Re: [RFC 1/1] acceptance tests: rename acceptance to system Date: Fri, 21 May 2021 14:03:34 +0100 In-reply-to: Message-ID: <87sg2gb5lf.fsf@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::336; envelope-from=alex.bennee@linaro.org; helo=mail-wm1-x336.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Thomas Huth , qemu-devel , Wainer dos Santos Moschetta , Niek Linnenbank , qemu-arm , Michael Rolnik , Willian Rampazzo , Cleber Rosa Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: "Qemu-devel" Philippe Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9 writes: > On 5/21/21 2:28 PM, Willian Rampazzo wrote: >> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 4:16 AM Thomas Huth wrote: >>> >>> On 20/05/2021 22.28, Philippe Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9 wrote: >>>> On 5/20/21 9:53 PM, Willian Rampazzo wrote: >>>>> Conceptually speaking, acceptance tests "are a series of specific tes= ts >>>>> conducted by the customer in an attempt to uncover product errors bef= ore >>>>> accepting the software from the developer. Conducted by the end-user = rather >>>>> than software engineers, acceptance testing can range from an informal >>>>> =E2=80=9Ctest drive=E2=80=9D to a planned and systematically executed= series of scripted >>>>> tests" [1]. Every time Pressman refers to the term "acceptance testin= g," he >>>>> also refers to user's agreement in the final state of an implemented = feature. >>>>> Today, QEMU is not implementing user acceptance tests as described by= Pressman. >>>>> >>>>> There are other three possible terms we could use to describe what is= currently >>>>> QEMU "acceptance" tests: >>>>> >>>>> 1 - Integration tests: >>>>> - "Integration testing is a systematic technique for construct= ing the >>>>> software architecture while at the same time conducting tes= ts to >>>>> uncover errors associated with interfacing. The objective i= s to take >>>>> unit-tested components and build a program structure that h= as been >>>>> dictated by design." [2] >>>>> * Note: Sommerville does not have a clear definition of integr= ation >>>>> testing. He refers to incremental integration of components = inside >>>>> the system testing (see [3]). >>> >>> After thinking about this for a while, I agree with you that renaming t= he >>> "acceptance" tests to "integration" tests is also not a good idea. When= I >>> hear "integration" test in the context of the virt stack, I'd rather ex= pect >>> a test suite that picks KVM (i.e. a kernel), QEMU, libvirt and maybe >>> virt-manager on top and tests them all together. So we should look for a >>> different name indeed. >>> >>>>> 2 - Validation tests: >>>>> - "Validation testing begins at the culmination of integration= testing, >>>>> when individual components have been exercised, the softwar= e is >>>>> completely assembled as a package, and interfacing errors h= ave been >>>>> uncovered and corrected. At the validation or system level,= the >>>>> distinction between different software categories disappear= s. Testing >>>>> focuses on user-visible actions and user-recognizable outpu= t from the >>>>> system." [4] >>>>> - "where you expect the system to perform correctly using a se= t of test >>>>> cases that reflect the system=E2=80=99s expected use." [5] >>>>> * Note: the definition of "validation testing" from Sommervill= e reflects >>>>> the same definition found around the Internet, as one of the= processes >>>>> inside the "Verification & Validation (V&V)." In this concep= t, >>>>> validation testing is a high-level definition that covers un= it testing, >>>>> functional testing, integration testing, system testing, and= acceptance >>>>> testing. >>>>> >>>>> 3 - System tests: >>>>> - "verifies that all elements mesh properly and that overall s= ystem >>>>> function and performance is achieved." [6] >>>>> - "involves integrating components to create a version of the = system and >>>>> then testing the integrated system. System testing checks t= hat >>>>> components are compatible, interact correctly, and transfer= the right >>>>> data at the right time across their interfaces." [7] >>>>> >>>>> The tests implemented inside the QEMU "acceptance" directory depend o= n the >>>>> software completely assembled and, sometimes, on other elements, like= operating >>>>> system images. In this case, the proposal here is to rename the curre= nt >>>>> "acceptance" directory to "system." >>>> >>>> Are user-mode tests using Avocado also system tests? >>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/qemu-devel@nongnu.org/msg782505.html >>> >>> We've indeed got the problem that the word "system" is a little bit >>> overloaded in the context of QEMU. We often talk about "system" when >>> referring to the qemu-softmmu-xxx emulators (in contrast to the linux-u= ser >>> emulator binaries). For example, the "--disable-system" switch of the >>> configure script, or the "build-system" and "check-system" jobs in the >>> .gitlab-ci.yml file ... thus this could get quite confusing in the >>> .gitlab-ci.yml file afterwards. >>=20 >> I agree with you here. After I made the changes to the code, I noticed >> QEMU has the "system" word spread all over the place. That may confuse >> people looking at the "system tests" without much interaction with >> software testing terminology. >>=20 >>> >>> So I think renaming "acceptance" to "system" is especially ok if we only >>> keep the "softmmu"-related tests in that folder... would it maybe make = sense >>> to add the linux-user related tests in a separate folder called tests/u= ser/ >>> instead, Philippe? And we should likely rename the current build-system= and >>> check-system jobs in our gitlab-CI to build-softmmu and check-softmmu o= r so? >>> >>=20 >> As I mentioned in Philippe's reply, those tests are still considered >> system tests because system testing is the software built and >> interacting with external test artifacts in software engineering. >>=20 >>> Alternatively, what about renaming the "acceptance" tests to "validatio= n" >>> instead? That word does not have a duplicated definition in the context= of >>> QEMU yet, so I think it would be less confusing. >>=20 >> While at the beginning of your reply, I started thinking if >> "validation" would cause less confusion for the QEMU project. Although >> validation testing is a broader concept inside the Verification & >> Validation process, encompassing unit testing, functional testing, >> integration testing, system testing, and acceptance testing, it may be >> an option for the QEMU project. >>=20 >> While system testing would be the correct terminology to use, if it >> causes more confusion, using a less strict terminology, like >> validation testing, is valid, in my opinion. > > This works for me: > > - tests/system/softmmu > - tests/system/user > > Or validation, as you prefer. So what are tests/tcg if not user tests? They *mostly* test linux-user emulation but of course we have softmmu tests in there as well.=20 > > Thanks for sharing the background references, > > Phil. --=20 Alex Benn=C3=A9e