| # Testing |
| |
| ## Test Suite Structure |
| |
| The LLDB test suite consists of three different kinds of test: |
| |
| - **Unit tests**: written in C++ using the googletest unit testing library. |
| - **Shell tests**: Integration tests that test the debugger through the command |
| line. These tests interact with the debugger either through the command line |
| driver or through `lldb-test` which is a tool that exposes the internal |
| data structures in an easy-to-parse way for testing. Most people will know |
| these as *lit tests* in LLVM, although lit is the test driver and ShellTest |
| is the test format that uses `RUN:` lines. [FileCheck](https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/FileCheck.html) is used to verify |
| the output. |
| - **API tests**: Integration tests that interact with the debugger through the |
| SB API. These are written in Python and use LLDB's `dotest.py` testing |
| framework on top of Python's [unittest](https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.html). |
| |
| All three test suites use `lit` ([LLVM Integrated Tester](https://llvm.org/docs/CommandGuide/lit.html) ) as the test driver. The test |
| suites can be run as a whole or separately. |
| |
| ### Unit Tests |
| |
| Unit tests are located under `lldb/unittests`. If it's possible to test |
| something in isolation or as a single unit, you should make it a unit test. |
| |
| Often you need instances of the core objects such as a debugger, target or |
| process, in order to test something meaningful. We already have a handful of |
| tests that have the necessary boiler plate, but this is something we could |
| abstract away and make it more user friendly. |
| |
| ### Shell Tests |
| |
| Shell tests are located under `lldb/test/Shell`. These tests are generally |
| built around checking the output of `lldb` (the command line driver) or |
| `lldb-test` using `FileCheck`. Shell tests are generally small and fast to |
| write because they require little boilerplate. |
| |
| `lldb-test` is a relatively new addition to the test suite. It was the first |
| tool that was added that is designed for testing. Since then it has been |
| continuously extended with new subcommands, improving our test coverage. Among |
| other things you can use it to query lldb for symbol files, for object files |
| and breakpoints. |
| |
| Obviously shell tests are great for testing the command line driver itself or |
| the subcomponents already exposed by lldb-test. But when it comes to LLDB's |
| vast functionality, most things can be tested both through the driver as well |
| as the Python API. For example, to test setting a breakpoint, you could do it |
| from the command line driver with `b main` or you could use the SB API and do |
| something like `target.BreakpointCreateByName` [^footnote-1]. |
| |
| A good rule of thumb is to prefer shell tests when what is being tested is |
| relatively simple. Expressivity is limited compared to the API tests, which |
| means that you have to have a well-defined test scenario that you can easily |
| match with `FileCheck`. Though Shell tests can be run remotely, behavior |
| specific to remote debugging must be tested with API tests instead. |
| |
| Another thing to consider are the binaries being debugged, which we call |
| inferiors. For shell tests, they have to be relatively simple. The |
| `dotest.py` test framework has extensive support for complex build scenarios |
| and different variants, which is described in more detail below, while shell |
| tests are limited to single lines of shell commands with compiler and linker |
| invocations. |
| |
| On the same topic, another interesting aspect of the shell tests is that there |
| you can often get away with a broken or incomplete binary, whereas the API |
| tests almost always require a fully functional executable. This enables testing |
| of (some) aspects of handling of binaries with non-native architectures or |
| operating systems. |
| |
| Finally, the shell tests always run in batch mode. You start with some input |
| and the test verifies the output. The debugger can be sensitive to its |
| environment, such as the platform it runs on. It can be hard to express |
| that the same test might behave slightly differently on macOS and Linux. |
| Additionally, the debugger is an interactive tool, and the shell test provide |
| no good way of testing those interactive aspects, such as tab completion for |
| example. |
| |
| ### API Tests |
| |
| API tests are located under `lldb/test/API`. They are run with the |
| `dotest.py`. Tests are written in Python and test binaries (inferiors) are |
| compiled with Make. The majority of API tests are end-to-end tests that compile |
| programs from source, run them, and debug the processes. |
| |
| As mentioned before, `dotest.py` is LLDB's testing framework. The |
| implementation is located under `lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite`. We have |
| several extensions and custom test primitives on top of what's offered by |
| [unittest](https://docs.python.org/3/library/unittest.html). Those can be |
| found in |
| [lldbtest.py](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/lldbtest.py). |
| |
| Below is the directory layout of the [example API test](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/tree/main/lldb/test/API/sample_test). |
| The test directory will always contain a python file, starting with `Test`. |
| Most of the tests are structured as a binary being debugged, so there will be |
| one or more source files and a `Makefile`. |
| |
| ``` |
| sample_test |
| ├── Makefile |
| ├── TestSampleTest.py |
| └── main.c |
| ``` |
| |
| Let's start with the Python test file. Every test is its own class and can have |
| one or more test methods, that start with `test_`. Many tests define |
| multiple test methods and share a bunch of common code. For example, for a |
| fictive test that makes sure we can set breakpoints we might have one test |
| method that ensures we can set a breakpoint by address, on that sets a |
| breakpoint by name and another that sets the same breakpoint by file and line |
| number. The setup, teardown and everything else other than setting the |
| breakpoint could be shared. |
| |
| Our testing framework also has a bunch of utilities that abstract common |
| operations, such as creating targets, setting breakpoints etc. When code is |
| shared across tests, we extract it into a utility in `lldbutil`. It's always |
| worth taking a look at [lldbutil](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/lldbutil.py) |
| to see if there's a utility to simplify some of the testing boiler plate. |
| Because we can't always audit every existing test, this is doubly true when |
| looking at an existing test for inspiration. |
| |
| It's possible to skip or [XFAIL](https://ftp.gnu.org/old-gnu/Manuals/dejagnu-1.3/html_node/dejagnu_6.html) |
| tests using decorators. You'll see them a lot. The debugger can be sensitive to |
| things like the architecture, the host and target platform, the compiler |
| version etc. LLDB comes with a range of predefined decorators for these |
| configurations. |
| |
| ``` |
| @expectedFailureAll(archs=["aarch64"], oslist=["linux"] |
| ``` |
| |
| Another great thing about these decorators is that they're very easy to extend, |
| it's even possible to define a function in a test case that determines whether |
| the test should be run or not. |
| |
| ``` |
| @skipTestIfFn(checking_function_name) |
| ``` |
| |
| In addition to providing a lot more flexibility when it comes to writing the |
| test, the API test also allow for much more complex scenarios when it comes to |
| building inferiors. Every test has its own `Makefile`, most of them only a |
| few lines long. A shared `Makefile` (`Makefile.rules`) with about a |
| thousand lines of rules takes care of most if not all of the boiler plate, |
| while individual make files can be used to build more advanced tests. |
| |
| Here's an example of a simple `Makefile` used by the example test. |
| |
| ``` |
| C_SOURCES := main.c |
| CFLAGS_EXTRAS := -std=c99 |
| |
| include Makefile.rules |
| ``` |
| |
| Finding the right variables to set can be tricky. You can always take a look at |
| [Makefile.rules](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/main/lldb/packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/make/Makefile.rules) |
| but often it's easier to find an existing `Makefile` that does something |
| similar to what you want to do. |
| |
| Another thing this enables is having different variants for the same test |
| case. By default, we run every test for two debug info formats, once with |
| DWARF from the object files and another with a dSYM on macOS or split |
| DWARF (DWO) on Linux. But there are many more things we can test |
| that are orthogonal to the test itself. On GreenDragon we have a matrix bot |
| that runs the test suite under different configurations, with older host |
| compilers and different DWARF versions. |
| |
| As you can imagine, this quickly lead to combinatorial explosion in the number |
| of variants. It's very tempting to add more variants because it's an easy way |
| to increase test coverage. It doesn't scale. It's easy to set up, but increases |
| the runtime of the tests and has a large ongoing cost. |
| |
| The test variants are most useful when developing a larger feature (e.g. support |
| for a new DWARF version). The test suite contains a large number of fairly |
| generic tests, so running the test suite with the feature enabled is a good way |
| to gain confidence that you haven't missed an important aspect. However, this |
| genericness makes them poor regression tests. Because it's not clear what a |
| specific test covers, a random modification to the test case can make it start |
| (or stop) testing a completely different part of your feature. And since these |
| tests tend to look very similar, it's easy for a simple bug to cause hundreds of |
| tests to fail in the same way. |
| |
| For this reason, we recommend using test variants only while developing a new |
| feature. This can often be done by running the test suite with different |
| arguments -- without any modifications to the code. You can create a focused |
| test for any bug found that way. Often, there will be many tests failing, but a |
| lot of then will have the same root cause. These tests will be easier to debug |
| and will not put undue burden on all other bots and developers. |
| |
| In conclusion, you'll want to opt for an API test to test the API itself or |
| when you need the expressivity, either for the test case itself or for the |
| program being debugged. The fact that the API tests work with different |
| variants mean that more general tests should be API tests, so that they can be |
| run against the different variants. |
| |
| #### Guidelines for API tests |
| |
| API tests are expected to be fast, reliable and maintainable. To achieve this |
| goal, API tests should conform to the following guidelines in addition to normal |
| good testing practices. |
| |
| **Don't unnecessarily launch the test executable.** |
| |
| : Launching a process and running to a breakpoint can often be the most |
| expensive part of a test and should be avoided if possible. A large part |
| of LLDB's functionality is available directly after creating an {any}`SBTarget` |
| of the test executable. |
| |
| The part of the SB API that can be tested with just a target includes |
| everything that represents information about the executable and its |
| debug information (e.g., {any}`SBTarget`, {any}`SBModule`, {any}`SBSymbolContext`, |
| {any}`SBFunction`, {any}`SBInstruction`, {any}`SBCompileUnit`, etc.). For test executables |
| written in languages with a type system that is mostly defined at compile |
| time (e.g., C and C++) there is also usually no process necessary to test |
| the {any}`SBType`-related parts of the API. With those languages it's also |
| possible to test {any}`SBValue` by running expressions with |
| {any}`SBTarget.EvaluateExpression` or the `expect_expr` testing utility. |
| |
| Functionality that always requires a running process is everything that |
| tests the {any}`SBProcess`, {any}`SBThread`, and {any}`SBFrame` classes. The same is true |
| for tests that exercise breakpoints, watchpoints and sanitizers. |
| Languages such as Objective-C that have a dependency on a runtime |
| environment also always require a running process. |
| |
| **Don't unnecessarily include system headers in test sources.** |
| |
| : Including external headers slows down the compilation of the test executable |
| and it makes reproducing test failures on other operating systems or |
| configurations harder. |
| |
| **Avoid specifying test-specific compiler flags when including system headers.** |
| |
| : If a test requires including a system header (e.g., a test for a libc++ |
| formatter includes a libc++ header), try to avoid specifying custom compiler |
| flags if possible. Certain debug information formats such as `gmodules` |
| use a cache that is shared between all API tests and that contains |
| precompiled system headers. If you add or remove a specific compiler flag |
| in your test (e.g., adding `-DFOO` to the `Makefile` or `self.build` |
| arguments), then the test will not use the shared precompiled header cache |
| and expensively recompile all system headers from scratch. If you depend on |
| a specific compiler flag for the test, you can avoid this issue by either |
| removing all system header includes or decorating the test function with |
| `@no_debug_info_test` (which will avoid running all debug information |
| variants including `gmodules`). |
| |
| **Test programs should be kept simple.** |
| |
| : Test executables should do the minimum amount of work to bring the process |
| into the state that is required for the test. Simulating a 'real' program |
| that actually tries to do some useful task rarely helps with catching bugs |
| and makes the test much harder to debug and maintain. The test programs |
| should always be deterministic (i.e., do not generate and check against |
| random test values). |
| |
| **Identifiers in tests should be simple and descriptive.** |
| |
| : Often test programs need to declare functions and classes which require |
| choosing some form of identifier for them. These identifiers should always |
| either be kept simple for small tests (e.g., `A`, `B`, ...) or have some |
| descriptive name (e.g., `ClassWithTailPadding`, `inlined_func`, ...). |
| Never choose identifiers that are already used anywhere else in LLVM or |
| other programs (e.g., don't name a class `VirtualFileSystem`, a function |
| `llvm_unreachable`, or a namespace `rapidxml`) as this will mislead |
| people `grep`'ing the LLVM repository for those strings. |
| |
| **Prefer LLDB testing utilities over directly working with the SB API.** |
| |
| : The `lldbutil` module and the `TestBase` class come with a large amount |
| of utility functions that can do common test setup tasks (e.g., starting a |
| test executable and running the process to a breakpoint). Using these |
| functions not only keeps the test shorter and free of duplicated code, but |
| they also follow best test suite practices and usually give much clearer |
| error messages if something goes wrong. The test utilities also contain |
| custom asserts and checks that should be preferably used (e.g. |
| `self.assertSuccess`). |
| |
| **Prefer calling the SB API over checking command output.** |
| |
| : Avoid writing your tests on top of `self.expect(...)` calls that check |
| the output of LLDB commands and instead try calling into the SB API. Relying |
| on LLDB commands makes changing (and improving) the output/syntax of |
| commands harder and the resulting tests are often prone to accepting |
| incorrect test results. Especially improved error messages that contain |
| more information might cause these `self.expect` calls to unintentionally |
| find the required `substrs`. For example, the following `self.expect` |
| check will unexpectedly pass if it's ran as the first expression in a test: |
| |
| ``` |
| self.expect("expr 2 + 2", substrs=["0"]) |
| ``` |
| |
| When running the same command in LLDB the reason for the unexpected success |
| is that '0' is found in the name of the implicitly created result variable: |
| |
| ``` |
| (lldb) expr 2 + 2 |
| (int) $0 = 4 |
| ^ The '0' substring is found here. |
| ``` |
| |
| A better way to write the test above would be using LLDB's testing function |
| `expect_expr` will only pass if the expression produces a value of 0: |
| |
| ``` |
| self.expect_expr("2 + 2", result_value="0") |
| ``` |
| |
| **Prefer using specific asserts over the generic assertTrue/assertFalse.**. |
| |
| : The `self.assertTrue`/`self.assertFalse` functions should always be your |
| last option as they give non-descriptive error messages. The test class has |
| several expressive asserts such as `self.assertIn` that automatically |
| generate an explanation how the received values differ from the expected |
| ones. Check the documentation of Python's `unittest` module to see what |
| asserts are available. LLDB also has a few custom asserts that are tailored |
| to our own data types. |
| |
| ```{eval-rst} |
| +-----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| | **Assert** | **Description** | |
| +-----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| | ``assertSuccess`` | Assert that an ``lldb.SBError`` is in the "success" state. | |
| +-----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| | ``assertState`` | Assert that two states (``lldb.eState*``) are equal. | |
| +-----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| | ``assertStopReason`` | Assert that two stop reasons (``lldb.eStopReason*``) are equal. | |
| +-----------------------------------------------+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |
| ``` |
| |
| > If you can't find a specific assert that fits your needs and you fall back |
| > to a generic assert, make sure you put useful information into the assert's |
| > `msg` argument that helps explain the failure. |
| |
| ``` |
| # Bad. Will print a generic error such as 'False is not True'. |
| self.assertTrue(expected_string in list_of_results) |
| # Good. Will print expected_string and the contents of list_of_results. |
| self.assertIn(expected_string, list_of_results) |
| ``` |
| |
| **Do not use hard-coded line numbers in your test case.** |
| |
| Instead, try to tag the line with some distinguishing pattern, and use the function line_number() defined in lldbtest.py which takes |
| filename and string_to_match as arguments and returns the line number. |
| |
| As an example, take a look at test/API/functionalities/breakpoint/breakpoint_conditions/main.c which has these |
| two lines: |
| |
| ```c |
| return c(val); // Find the line number of c's parent call here. |
| ``` |
| |
| and |
| |
| ```c |
| return val + 3; // Find the line number of function "c" here. |
| ``` |
| |
| The Python test case TestBreakpointConditions.py uses the comment strings to find the line numbers during setUp(self) and use them |
| later on to verify that the correct breakpoint is being stopped on and that its parent frame also has the correct line number as |
| intended through the breakpoint condition. |
| |
| **Take advantage of the unittest framework's decorator features.** |
| |
| These features can be use to properly mark your test class or method for platform-specific tests, compiler specific, version specific. |
| |
| As an example, take a look at test/API/lang/c/forward/TestForwardDeclaration.py which has these lines: |
| |
| ```python |
| @no_debug_info_test |
| @skipIfDarwin |
| @skipIf(compiler=no_match("clang")) |
| @skipIf(compiler_version=["<", "8.0"]) |
| @expectedFailureAll(oslist=["windows"]) |
| def test_debug_names(self): |
| """Test that we are able to find complete types when using DWARF v5 |
| accelerator tables""" |
| self.do_test(dict(CFLAGS_EXTRAS="-gdwarf-5 -gpubnames")) |
| ``` |
| |
| This tells the test harness that unless we are running "linux" and clang version equal & above 8.0, the test should be skipped. |
| |
| **Class-wise cleanup after yourself.** |
| |
| TestBase.tearDownClass(cls) provides a mechanism to invoke the platform-specific cleanup after finishing with a test class. A test |
| class can have more than one test methods, so the tearDownClass(cls) method gets run after all the test methods have been executed by |
| the test harness. |
| |
| The default cleanup action performed by the packages/Python/lldbsuite/test/lldbtest.py module invokes the "make clean" os command. |
| |
| If this default cleanup is not enough, individual class can provide an extra cleanup hook with a class method named classCleanup , |
| for example, in test/API/terminal/TestSTTYBeforeAndAfter.py: |
| |
| ```python |
| @classmethod |
| def classCleanup(cls): |
| """Cleanup the test byproducts.""" |
| cls.RemoveTempFile("child_send1.txt") |
| ``` |
| |
| The 'child_send1.txt' file gets generated during the test run, so it makes sense to explicitly spell out the action in the same |
| TestSTTYBeforeAndAfter.py file to do the cleanup instead of artificially adding it as part of the default cleanup action which serves to |
| cleanup those intermediate and a.out files. |
| |
| ## CI |
| |
| LLVM Buildbot is the place where volunteers provide machines for building and |
| testing. Everyone can [add a buildbot for LLDB](https://llvm.org/docs/HowToAddABuilder.html). |
| |
| An overview of all LLDB builders can be found here: |
| |
| [https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders?tags=lldb](https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders?tags=lldb) |
| |
| Building and testing for macOS uses a different platform called GreenDragon. It |
| has a dedicated tab for LLDB: [https://green.lab.llvm.org/job/llvm.org/view/LLDB/](https://green.lab.llvm.org/job/llvm.org/view/LLDB/) |
| |
| ## Running The Tests |
| |
| :::{note} |
| On Windows any invocations of python should be replaced with python_d, the |
| debug interpreter, when running the test suite against a debug version of |
| LLDB. |
| ::: |
| |
| :::{note} |
| On NetBSD you must export `LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD/lib` in your environment. |
| This is due to lack of the `$ORIGIN` linker feature. |
| ::: |
| |
| ### Running the Full Test Suite |
| |
| The easiest way to run the LLDB test suite is to use the `check-lldb` build |
| target. |
| |
| ``` |
| $ ninja check-lldb |
| ``` |
| |
| ### Changing Test Suite Options |
| |
| By default, the `check-lldb` target builds the test programs with the same |
| compiler that was used to build LLDB. To build the tests with a different |
| compiler, you can set the `LLDB_TEST_COMPILER` CMake variable. |
| |
| You can also add to the test runner options by setting the |
| `LLDB_TEST_USER_ARGS` CMake variable. This variable uses `;` to separate |
| items which must be separate parts of the runner's command line. |
| |
| It is possible to customize the architecture of the test binaries and compiler |
| used by appending `-A` and `-C` options respectively. For example, to test |
| LLDB against 32-bit binaries built with a custom version of clang, do: |
| |
| ``` |
| $ cmake -DLLDB_TEST_USER_ARGS="-A;i386;-C;/path/to/custom/clang" -G Ninja |
| $ ninja check-lldb |
| ``` |
| |
| Note that multiple `-A` and `-C` flags can be specified to |
| `LLDB_TEST_USER_ARGS`. |
| |
| If you want to change the LLDB settings that tests run with then you can set |
| the `--setting` option of the test runner via this same variable. For example |
| `--setting;target.disable-aslr=true`. |
| |
| For a full list of test runner options, see |
| `<build-dir>/bin/lldb-dotest --help`. |
| |
| ### Running a Single Test Suite |
| |
| Each test suite can be run separately, similar to running the whole test suite |
| with `check-lldb`. |
| |
| - Use `check-lldb-unit` to run just the unit tests. |
| - Use `check-lldb-api` to run just the SB API tests. |
| - Use `check-lldb-shell` to run just the shell tests. |
| |
| You can run specific subdirectories by appending the directory name to the |
| target. For example, to run all the tests in `ObjectFile`, you can use the |
| target `check-lldb-shell-objectfile`. However, because the unit tests and API |
| tests don't actually live under `lldb/test`, this convenience is only |
| available for the shell tests. |
| |
| ### Running a Single Test |
| |
| The recommended way to run a single test is by invoking the lit driver with a |
| filter. This ensures that the test is run with the same configuration as when |
| run as part of a test suite. |
| |
| ``` |
| $ ./bin/llvm-lit -sv <llvm-project-root>/lldb/test --filter <test> |
| ``` |
| |
| Because lit automatically scans a directory for tests, it's also possible to |
| pass a subdirectory to run a specific subset of the tests. |
| |
| ``` |
| $ ./bin/llvm-lit -sv <llvm-project-root>/lldb/test/Shell/Commands/CommandScriptImmediateOutput |
| ``` |
| |
| For the SB API tests it is possible to forward arguments to `dotest.py` by |
| passing `--param` to lit and setting a value for `dotest-args`. |
| |
| ``` |
| $ ./bin/llvm-lit -sv <llvm-project-root>/lldb/test --param dotest-args='-C gcc' |
| ``` |
| |
| Below is an overview of running individual test in the unit and API test suites |
| without going through the lit driver. |
| |
| ### Running a Specific Test or Set of Tests: API Tests |
| |
| In addition to running all the LLDB test suites with the `check-lldb` CMake |
| target above, it is possible to run individual LLDB tests. If you have a CMake |
| build you can use the `lldb-dotest` binary, which is a wrapper around |
| `dotest.py` that passes all the arguments configured by CMake. |
| |
| Alternatively, you can use `dotest.py` directly, if you want to run a test |
| one-off with a different configuration. |
| |
| For example, to run the test cases defined in TestInferiorCrashing.py, run: |
| |
| ``` |
| $ ./bin/lldb-dotest -p TestInferiorCrashing.py |
| ``` |
| |
| ``` |
| $ cd $lldb/test |
| $ python dotest.py --executable <path-to-lldb> -p TestInferiorCrashing.py ../packages/Python/lldbsuite/test |
| ``` |
| |
| If the test is not specified by name (e.g. if you leave the `-p` argument |
| off), all tests in that directory will be executed: |
| |
| ``` |
| $ ./bin/lldb-dotest functionalities/data-formatter |
| ``` |
| |
| ``` |
| $ python dotest.py --executable <path-to-lldb> functionalities/data-formatter |
| ``` |
| |
| Many more options that are available. To see a list of all of them, run: |
| |
| ``` |
| $ python dotest.py -h |
| ``` |
| |
| ### Running a Specific Test or Set of Tests: Unit Tests |
| |
| The unit tests are simple executables, located in the build directory under `tools/lldb/unittests`. |
| |
| To run them, just run the test binary, for example, to run all the Host tests: |
| |
| ``` |
| $ ./tools/lldb/unittests/Host/HostTests |
| ``` |
| |
| To run a specific test, pass a filter, for example: |
| |
| ``` |
| $ ./tools/lldb/unittests/Host/HostTests --gtest_filter=SocketTest.DomainListenConnectAccept |
| ``` |
| |
| ### Running the Test Suite Remotely |
| |
| 1. Run lldb-server on the remote system, so that it can accept multiple connections. |
| This is called "platform" mode: |
| |
| ``` |
| lldb-server platform --server --listen 0.0.0.0:<port A> --gdbserver-port <port B> |
| ``` |
| |
| Assuming that `port A` and `port B` on the remote system can be reached |
| from your host system. If your remote system is a simulator on your host machine, |
| you may need to forward these ports to the host when you start the simulator. |
| |
| For more information on how to setup remote debugging see {doc}`/use/remote`. |
| |
| 2. Tell the test-suite how to connect to the remote system. This is done using the |
| `LLDB_TEST_PLATFORM_URL` and `LLDB_TEST_PLATFORM_WORKING_DIR` flags of CMake, |
| or the `--platform-name`, `--platform-url` and `--platform-working-dir` |
| parameters of `dotest.py`. These parameters are passed on to the `platform select` |
| and `platform connect` LLDB commands when the tests are run. |
| |
| You will usually need to specify the compiler and target triple for the |
| remote system. This is done with CMake options `LLDB_TEST_COMPILER` and |
| `LLDB_TEST_TRIPLE`, or the `dotest.py` options `--compiler` and `--triple`. |
| |
| :::{note} |
| Even in cases where the two systems are the same architecture and run the |
| same operating system, there may be version differences between the two |
| which require you to use a different compiler version for remote testing. |
| ::: |
| |
| For example, to run tests using `dotest.py` on a remote AArch64 Linux system |
| you might run: |
| |
| ``` |
| ./bin/lldb-dotest --platform-name remote-linux --triple aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu --compiler aarch64-none-linux-gnu-gcc --platform-url connect://<remote-ip>:<port A> --platform-working-dir /tmp/test_lldb -p <test-name>.py |
| ``` |
| |
| This is the equivalent of: |
| |
| > - `LLDB_TEST_TRIPLE` = `aarch64-unknown-linux-gnu` |
| > - `LLDB_TEST_COMPILER` = `aarch64-none-linux-gnu-gcc` |
| > - `LLDB_TEST_PLATFORM_URL` = `connect://<remote-ip>:<port A>` |
| > - `LLDB_TEST_PLATFORM_WORKING_DIR` = `/tmp/test_lldb` |
| |
| Setting these values using CMake allows you to run `ninja check-lldb` to run |
| tests on the remote system. |
| |
| If you have a host build that you sometimes check on a remote system, but otherwise |
| test on the host, adding arguments to `dotest.py` manually is easier. |
| |
| :::{note} |
| Remote Shell test execution is currently supported only for Linux targets. |
| It is enabled when `LLDB_TEST_SYSROOT` is set. Remote Shell testing can |
| be disabled by setting `LLDB_TEST_SHELL_DISABLE_REMOTE=On`. Shell tests |
| are not guaranteed to pass against remote target if the test compiler is not |
| Clang. |
| ::: |
| |
| ### Running tests in QEMU System Emulation Environment |
| |
| QEMU can be used to test LLDB in an emulation environment in the absence of |
| actual hardware. {doc}`/resources/qemu-testing` describes how to setup an |
| emulation environment using QEMU helper scripts found in |
| `llvm-project/lldb/scripts/lldb-test-qemu`. These scripts currently |
| work with Arm or AArch64, but support for other architectures can be added easily. |
| |
| ## Debugging Test Failures |
| |
| On non-Windows platforms, you can use the `-d` option to `dotest.py` which |
| will cause the script to print out the pid of the test and wait for a while |
| until a debugger is attached. Then run `lldb -p <pid>` to attach. |
| |
| To instead debug a test's python source, edit the test and insert `import pdb; pdb.set_trace()` or `breakpoint()` (Python 3 only) at the point you want to start debugging. The `breakpoint()` command can be used for any LLDB Python script, not just for API tests. |
| |
| In addition to pdb's debugging facilities, lldb commands can be executed with the |
| help of a pdb alias. For example `lldb bt` and `lldb v some_var`. Add this |
| line to your `~/.pdbrc`: |
| |
| ``` |
| alias lldb self.dbg.HandleCommand("%*") |
| ``` |
| |
| ### Debugging Test Failures on Windows |
| |
| On Windows, it is strongly recommended to use Python Tools for Visual Studio |
| for debugging test failures. It can seamlessly step between native and managed |
| code, which is very helpful when you need to step through the test itself, and |
| then into the LLDB code that backs the operations the test is performing. |
| |
| A quick guide to getting started with PTVS is as follows: |
| |
| 1. Install PTVS |
| 2. Create a Visual Studio Project for the Python code. |
| : 1. Go to File -> New -> Project -> Python -> From Existing Python Code. |
| 2. Choose llvm/tools/lldb as the directory containing the Python code. |
| 3. When asked where to save the .pyproj file, choose the folder `llvm/tools/lldb/pyproj`. This is a special folder that is ignored by the `.gitignore` file, since it is not checked in. |
| 3. Set test/dotest.py as the startup file |
| 4. Make sure there is a Python Environment installed for your distribution. For example, if you installed Python to `C:\Python35`, PTVS needs to know that this is the interpreter you want to use for running the test suite. |
| : 1. Go to Tools -> Options -> Python Tools -> Environment Options |
| 2. Click Add Environment, and enter Python 3.5 Debug for the name. Fill out the values correctly. |
| 5. Configure the project to use this debug interpreter. |
| : 1. Right click the Project node in Solution Explorer. |
| 2. In the General tab, Make sure Python 3.5 Debug is the selected Interpreter. |
| 3. In Debug/Search Paths, enter the path to your ninja/lib/site-packages directory. |
| 4. In Debug/Environment Variables, enter `VCINSTALLDIR=C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio\2019\Community\VC\`. |
| 5. If you want to enabled mixed mode debugging, check Enable native code debugging (this slows down debugging, so enable it only on an as-needed basis.) |
| 6. Set the command line for the test suite to run. |
| : 1. Right click the project in solution explorer and choose the Debug tab. |
| 2. Enter the arguments to dotest.py. |
| 3. Example command options: |
| |
| ``` |
| --arch=i686 |
| # Path to debug lldb.exe |
| --executable D:/src/llvmbuild/ninja/bin/lldb.exe |
| # Directory to store log files |
| -s D:/src/llvmbuild/ninja/lldb-test-traces |
| -u CXXFLAGS -u CFLAGS |
| # If a test crashes, show JIT debugging dialog. |
| --enable-crash-dialog |
| # Path to release clang.exe |
| -C d:\src\llvmbuild\ninja_release\bin\clang.exe |
| # Path to the particular test you want to debug. |
| -p TestPaths.py |
| # Root of test tree |
| D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test |
| ``` |
| |
| ``` |
| --arch=i686 --executable D:/src/llvmbuild/ninja/bin/lldb.exe -s D:/src/llvmbuild/ninja/lldb-test-traces -u CXXFLAGS -u CFLAGS --enable-crash-dialog -C d:\src\llvmbuild\ninja_release\bin\clang.exe -p TestPaths.py D:\src\llvm\tools\lldb\packages\Python\lldbsuite\test --no-multiprocess |
| ``` |
| |
| [^footnote-1]: [https://lldb.llvm.org/python_reference/lldb.SBTarget-class.html#BreakpointCreateByName](https://lldb.llvm.org/python_reference/lldb.SBTarget-class.html#BreakpointCreateByName) |