add validate_test.go to do unit test #188

liangchenye · 2016-08-09T11:17:39Z

Only add a test case on checkSemVer in this PR.
Signed-off-by: liang chenye [email protected]

wking · 2016-08-09T16:38:46Z

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 04:17:40AM -0700, 梁辰晔 (Liang Chenye) wrote:

-- File Changes --
A cmd/ocitools/validate_test.go (27)

You probably want to add a Makefile and/or .travis.yml entry to run
these tests from Travis.

wking · 2016-08-09T16:45:19Z

cmd/ocitools/validate_test.go

+	for _, c := range cases {
+		spec.Version = c.v
+		msg := checkSemVer(spec, "", false)
+		if len(msg) != c.expected {


Is “number of error messages” really what we want to be checking here? I'd rather have a bunch of potential version strings with true/false for whether we thought they were valid, and error if we thought a version was valid and checkSemVer gave us error messages at all (logging the error messages with t.Fatalf) or if we thought a version was invalid and checkSemVer did not give us error messages.

You are right, it is not necessary to check the number of error messages.

wking · 2016-08-09T16:57:37Z

On Tue, Aug 09, 2016 at 04:17:40AM -0700, 梁辰晔 (Liang Chenye) wrote:

A cmd/ocitools/validate_test.go (27)

While I'm in favor of Go tests for our implementation, I'm not sure
it's worth testing cmd/… helpers. I'd rather see the validation code
pulled out into a Go library (like generate/…) and test that. Then
the cmd/… stuff should be a thin wrapper around that API, the API is
tested with ‘go test’ like you have here, and the command-line wrapper
is tested with sharness like I've floated in #180.

We'll also want a way to distinguish between “that's not valid” errors
[1](which are like HTTP 400s) and “that may be valid, but we can't
check it yet” errors [2](which are like HTTP 500s). My preferred
approach for that is to use Python's unittest and skip which lets you
handle generic JSON easily (vs. the current Go based on the
runtime-spec types or a hypothetical Go framework based on
interface{}). More on that in #98.

liangchenye · 2016-09-01T11:21:35Z

I think it is a good idea to move 'validate' to a new directory like 'generate', I'll make a patch to move that.

(just back from a long time leaving)

liangchenye · 2016-09-01T13:35:20Z

commit 82d0b38 moves validate directory out of cmd directory and add a 'validator' struct just like 'generator'.

commit 8b7ba22 adds a new unit test style based on Wking's comment

@wking @mrunalp PTAL

wking · 2016-09-01T17:07:00Z

validate/validate_test.go

+		expected bool
+	}{
+		{rspec.Version, true},
+		{"0.0.1", false},


0.0.1 looks like valid SemVer to me. What's the error message?

Currently only support rspec.Version.

if version != rspec.Version { msgs = append(msgs, fmt.Sprintf("internal error: validate currently only handles version %s, but the supplied configuration targets %s", rspec.Version, version)) }

On Mon, Sep 05, 2016 at 03:38:57AM -0700, David Liang wrote:

{"0.0.1", false},

Currently only support rspec.Version.

So maybe leave a comment on this line that we're confirming a
shortcoming of the current test suite with this entry.

Thanks, I added a 'FIXME' to mention this.

wking · 2016-09-08T03:46:54Z

validate/validate.go

+type Validator struct {
+	spec         rspec.Spec
+	rootfs       string
+	hostSpecific bool


I'd rather make these properties public, and Generator.HostSpecific is public. Do you have any reason to keep any of them private?

Do we need to see and modify these? I think the 'Check*' functions are enough.

On Wed, Sep 07, 2016 at 09:04:44PM -0700, 梁辰晔 (Liang Chenye) wrote:

+type Validator struct {

spec rspec.Spec

rootfs string

hostSpecific bool

Do we need to see and modify these? I think the 'Check*' functions
are enough.

Making them public means you don't need getters/setters and you can
still support users who want to partially setup the instance when they
call NewValidator (or whatever 1) and finish the setup later. Or if
they want to peer inside to get more details on why their validation
is failing. Or who knows? I'd rather err on the side of “we're all
consenting adults” 2, because I don't see a way to make validation
go terribly wrong if a user gets or sets one of these values whenever
they like.

A downside to making things public is that changing them breaks your public API. But this is going to be a stable, boring implementation based on a stable, boring spec right ;)? I don't expect lots of property churn as we figure out what we need to validate configurations, so I'm not worried about the slight increase in API surface area dragging us down with backwards-compat issues.

liangchenye · 2016-09-08T06:46:22Z

Hi @wking , I modified codes according to your suggestion.
Just one difference: using RootfsPath other than BundlePath in Validator{} .

wking · 2016-09-08T06:46:35Z

validate/validate.go

+		return Validator{}, fmt.Errorf("Cannot find the root path %q", rootfsPath)
+	} else if !fi.IsDir() {
+		return Validator{}, fmt.Errorf("The root path %q is not a directory.", rootfsPath)
+	}


This “does the rootfs exist” check should be a separate check in Validator.CheckAll()

done in new commit!

liangchenye · 2016-09-18T12:24:16Z

Rebase by using 'runtime-tools'.
Merge two commits (one for restruct and one for unit test case) into one. The original change log can not reflect the real meaning, code changes a lot after discussions with @wking.

@mrunalp PTAL

wking · 2016-09-19T03:58:26Z

validate/validate.go

+	return Validator{spec: spec, bundlePath: bundlePath, HostSpecific: hostSpecific}
+}
+
+func NewValidatorFromPath(bundlePath string, hostSpecific bool) (Validator, error) {


I think these NewValidator* functions should return (*Validator, error).

wking · 2016-09-19T04:13:05Z

a8c02cf looks good enough to me (I think we've agreed to punt on everything I'd still like to change).

liangchenye · 2016-10-06T08:57:32Z

Travis fails because of:
#230

liangchenye · 2016-10-06T09:01:17Z

#7cd3aa1 rebased on top of current 'master'.
Only difference with '#a8c02cf ' is '7cd3aa1' includes Mashimiao's new patch:
'validate: add hard and soft limit check for rlimit'
e129a67

@Mashimiao @mrunalp PTAL

vbatts · 2016-10-06T13:56:20Z

so the test fail is due to go1.5?

liangchenye · 2016-10-07T02:52:45Z

@vbatts yes, I'll rebuild the CI.

The command "go get github.com/golang/lint/golint" failed and exited with 2 during

Signed-off-by: liang chenye <[email protected]>

liangchenye · 2016-10-12T13:10:41Z

@mrunalp @Mashimiao rebased.
Merge new IsAbs and const 'config.json' changes.

It is a code struct change, please PTAL first :)

Mashimiao · 2016-10-13T01:31:01Z

bde9989 looks good to me

mrunalp · 2016-10-18T23:40:27Z

LGTM

wking reviewed Aug 9, 2016
View reviewed changes

liangchenye force-pushed the gotest branch from 89251f1 to 82d0b38 Compare September 1, 2016 12:29

wking reviewed Sep 1, 2016
View reviewed changes

liangchenye force-pushed the gotest branch from 8b7ba22 to 79cc4ba Compare September 8, 2016 03:35

wking reviewed Sep 8, 2016
View reviewed changes

liangchenye force-pushed the gotest branch from 79cc4ba to 687c61c Compare September 8, 2016 06:41

wking reviewed Sep 8, 2016
View reviewed changes

liangchenye force-pushed the gotest branch from 687c61c to 06163fe Compare September 8, 2016 14:04

liangchenye force-pushed the gotest branch 2 times, most recently from 8d5cb3a to a8c02cf Compare September 18, 2016 12:17

wking reviewed Sep 19, 2016

View reviewed changes

wking mentioned this pull request Sep 22, 2016

Drop image tools cmd/ and image/ opencontainers/image-spec#337

Merged

Mashimiao mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2016

validate: optimize capabilites check #220

Merged

liangchenye force-pushed the gotest branch from a8c02cf to 7cd3aa1 Compare October 6, 2016 08:16

liangchenye force-pushed the gotest branch from 7cd3aa1 to 7ca97fe Compare October 8, 2016 01:17

move validate to its dir; add CheckSemVer unittest

bde9989

Signed-off-by: liang chenye <[email protected]>

liangchenye force-pushed the gotest branch from 7ca97fe to bde9989 Compare October 12, 2016 13:05

mrunalp merged commit 7ff34fc into opencontainers:master Oct 18, 2016

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

add validate_test.go to do unit test #188

add validate_test.go to do unit test #188

liangchenye commented Aug 9, 2016

wking commented Aug 9, 2016

wking Aug 9, 2016

liangchenye Sep 1, 2016

wking commented Aug 9, 2016

liangchenye commented Sep 1, 2016

liangchenye commented Sep 1, 2016

wking Sep 1, 2016 •

edited

Loading

initlove Sep 5, 2016

wking Sep 6, 2016

liangchenye Sep 8, 2016

wking Sep 8, 2016

liangchenye Sep 8, 2016

wking Sep 8, 2016

wking Sep 8, 2016 via email

liangchenye commented Sep 8, 2016

wking Sep 8, 2016

liangchenye Sep 8, 2016

liangchenye commented Sep 18, 2016

wking Sep 19, 2016

wking commented Sep 19, 2016 via email

liangchenye commented Oct 6, 2016

liangchenye commented Oct 6, 2016

vbatts commented Oct 6, 2016

liangchenye commented Oct 7, 2016

liangchenye commented Oct 12, 2016

Mashimiao commented Oct 13, 2016

mrunalp commented Oct 18, 2016

add validate_test.go to do unit test #188

add validate_test.go to do unit test #188

Conversation

liangchenye commented Aug 9, 2016

wking commented Aug 9, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

wking commented Aug 9, 2016

liangchenye commented Sep 1, 2016

liangchenye commented Sep 1, 2016

wking Sep 1, 2016 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

wking Sep 8, 2016 via email

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liangchenye commented Sep 8, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

liangchenye commented Sep 18, 2016

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

wking commented Sep 19, 2016 via email

liangchenye commented Oct 6, 2016

liangchenye commented Oct 6, 2016

vbatts commented Oct 6, 2016

liangchenye commented Oct 7, 2016

liangchenye commented Oct 12, 2016

Mashimiao commented Oct 13, 2016

mrunalp commented Oct 18, 2016

wking Sep 1, 2016 •

edited

Loading