nihilist/tor
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://gitlab.torproject.org/tpo/core/tor.git synced 2024-09-21 21:44:58 +02:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
4753ad4f1d
tor/changes/fancy_testing

17 lines
718 B
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Start work on fancy compiler tricks to expose extra stuff to our tests This is mainly a matter of automake trickery: we build each static library in two versions now: one with the TOR_UNIT_TESTS macro defined, and one without. When TOR_UNIT_TESTS is defined, we can enable mocking and expose more functions. When it's not defined, we can lock the binary down more. The alternatives would be to have alternate build modes: a "testing configuration" for building the libraries with test support, and a "production configuration" for building them without. I don't favor that approach, since I think it would mean more people runnning binaries build for testing, or more people not running unit tests.
2013-06-06 20:56:05 +02:00
o Build features:
- Tor now builds each source file in two modes: a mode that avoids
exposing identifiers needlessly, and another mode that exposes
more identifiers for testing. This lets the compiler do better at
optimizing the production code, while enabling us to take more
radical measures to let the unit tests test things.
Completely refactor how FILENAME_PRIVATE works We previously used FILENAME_PRIVATE identifiers mostly for identifiers exposed only to the unit tests... but also for identifiers exposed to the benchmarker, and sometimes for identifiers exposed to a similar module, and occasionally for no really good reason at all. Now, we use FILENAME_PRIVATE identifiers for identifiers shared by Tor and the unit tests. They should be defined static when we aren't building the unit test, and globally visible otherwise. (The STATIC macro will keep us honest here.) For identifiers used only by the unit tests and never by Tor at all, on the other hand, we wrap them in #ifdef TOR_UNIT_TESTS. This is not the motivating use case for the split test/non-test build system; it's just a test example to see how it works, and to take a chance to clean up the code a little.
2013-06-06 23:58:28 +02:00
- The production builds no longer include functions used only
in the unit tests; all functions exposed from a module for
unit-testing only are now static in production builds.
Start work on fancy compiler tricks to expose extra stuff to our tests This is mainly a matter of automake trickery: we build each static library in two versions now: one with the TOR_UNIT_TESTS macro defined, and one without. When TOR_UNIT_TESTS is defined, we can enable mocking and expose more functions. When it's not defined, we can lock the binary down more. The alternatives would be to have alternate build modes: a "testing configuration" for building the libraries with test support, and a "production configuration" for building them without. I don't favor that approach, since I think it would mean more people runnning binaries build for testing, or more people not running unit tests.
2013-06-06 20:56:05 +02:00
Coverage support: build with --enable-coverage to have tests run with gcov If you pass the --enable-coverage flag on the command line, we build our testing binaries with appropriate options eo enable coverage testing. We also build a "tor-cov" binary that has coverage enabled, for integration tests. On recent OSX versions, test coverage only works with clang, not gcc. So we warn about that. Also add a contrib/coverage script to actually run gcov with the appropriate options to generate useful .gcov files. (Thanks to automake, the .o files will not have the names that gcov expects to find.) Also, remove generated gcda and gcno files on clean.
2013-07-09 18:37:11 +02:00
- Add an --enable-coverage configuration option to make the unit
tests (and a new src/or/tor-cov target) to build with gcov test
coverage support.
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink