Skip to content

Conversation

@roypat
Copy link
Contributor

@roypat roypat commented Apr 15, 2025

  • Do not silently soldier on when firecracker compilation fails as part of devtool test
  • suggest passing --no-build together with --ab when doing manual A/B tests

License Acceptance

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following Developer
Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md.

PR Checklist

  • I have read and understand CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • I have run tools/devtool checkstyle to verify that the PR passes the
    automated style checks.
  • I have described what is done in these changes, why they are needed, and
    how they are solving the problem in a clear and encompassing way.
  • I have updated any relevant documentation (both in code and in the docs)
    in the PR.
  • I have mentioned all user-facing changes in CHANGELOG.md.
  • If a specific issue led to this PR, this PR closes the issue.
  • When making API changes, I have followed the
    Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
  • I have tested all new and changed functionalities in unit tests and/or
    integration tests.
  • I have linked an issue to every new TODO.

  • This functionality cannot be added in rust-vmm.

roypat added 2 commits April 15, 2025 15:58
way too often have I accidentally ran an out dated firecracker binary
when testing something because a change I made doesnt compile, but the
failure to build firecracker wasn't considered fatal by devtool, and the
sheer amount of stuff it prints after compiling pushed the compiler
error offscreen.

Fix this by exiting if firecracker fails to build.

Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
When running A/B tests, this part of the documentation explicitly builds
firecracker from two revisions. However, after that it will _still_
build Firecracker from HEAD _again_, even though this third compilation
of firecracker is not needed: The A/B test will only ever use the
precompiled binaries.

Fix this by passing --no-build in the example

Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 15, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 83.09%. Comparing base (3602e9e) to head (2f8b990).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5157      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   83.04%   83.09%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         250      250              
  Lines       26892    26892              
==========================================
+ Hits        22332    22346      +14     
+ Misses       4560     4546      -14     
Flag Coverage Δ
5.10-c5n.metal 83.59% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m5n.metal 83.58% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
5.10-m6a.metal 82.81% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6g.metal 79.38% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6i.metal 83.57% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m7a.metal-48xl 82.79% <ø> (?)
5.10-m7g.metal 79.38% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m7i.metal-24xl 83.55% <ø> (?)
5.10-m7i.metal-48xl 83.55% <ø> (?)
5.10-m8g.metal-24xl 79.38% <ø> (?)
5.10-m8g.metal-48xl 79.37% <ø> (?)
6.1-c5n.metal 83.63% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
6.1-m5n.metal 83.63% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
6.1-m6a.metal 82.85% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m6g.metal 79.37% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m6i.metal 83.62% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m7a.metal-48xl 82.84% <ø> (?)
6.1-m7g.metal 79.37% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m7i.metal-24xl 83.64% <ø> (?)
6.1-m7i.metal-48xl 83.64% <ø> (?)
6.1-m8g.metal-24xl 79.37% <ø> (?)
6.1-m8g.metal-48xl 79.37% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@roypat roypat added the Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed label Apr 15, 2025
@roypat roypat merged commit cdd7dcb into firecracker-microvm:main Apr 15, 2025
7 of 8 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants