toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
This looks really good and I agree we can combine the
RFCs and enable more pre-commits tests.
Additional responses below.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com> On
Behalf Of Sean via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2019 7:22 PM
To: firstname.lastname@example.org; Kinney, Michael D
Cc: Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew@...>
Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [RFC] EDK II Continuous
Integration Phase 1
Mike, as you mentioned we have been working towards
enabling a practical and extensible CI for Edk2 using
Azure dev ops and the recently added edk2-pytool
infrastructure. We have been using similar CI for
Project Mu for the last few years.
Our approach is a little different in that we focus on
validating the whole code base rather than just the
incoming patch. We do this because we have found
unexpected consequences of patches and overall we want
all code to be compliant not just new additions. We
have found the time to test the whole tree is not much
longer than only the parts impacted by a code change
(except maybe when running the entire compile test on
every package). This obviously comes with an initial
tax of needing to get the codebase into compliant form.
Anyway we have prepared an RFC in addition to yours and
would like to see these two efforts merged together.
I am in favor of complete code base testing as long as the
time to complete the tests is reasonable. We can do both
patch level testing to make sure the patches are well
formatted. Focused testing on the components modified by
the patches and some amount of complete testing to find any
unexpected side effects.
We are still working on making a few optimizations.
Currently if the full set of tests are run we take
about 20 minutes. This is because compiling
MdeModulePkg for debug, release, and host based tests
take a while. Most other packages are in the 10 minute
range. We do have easy ways to disable or limit
certain tests as well as expand the matrix to leverage
more cloud resources (more parallel builds).
Content is best viewed online with links to helpful
content but is also attached below:
# CI and PR Gates
Historically, while the TianoCore maintainers and
stewards have done a fantastic job of keeping
contribution policies consistent and contributions
clean and well-documented, there have been few
processes that ran to verify the sanity, cleanliness,
and efficacy of the codebase, and even fewer that
publicly published their results for the community at
large. This has caused inconsistancies and issues
within the codebase from time to time.
Adding continuous integration (and potentially PR
gates) to the checkin process ensures that simple
errors like these are caught and can be fixed on a
While a number of CI solutions exist, this proposal
will focus on the usage of Azure Dev Ops and Build
Pipelines. For demonstration, a sample [TianoCore
(branch edk2-stuart-ci-latest) and [Dev Ops
play/_build?definitionId=12) have been set up.
Furthermore, this proposal will leverage the TianoCore
python tools PIP modules:
extensions/) (with repos located
library) and [here](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-
The primary execution flows can be found in the `azure-
pipelines-pr-gate.yml` and `azure-pipelines-pr-gate-
linux.yml` files. These YAML files are consumed by the
Azure Dev Ops Build Pipeline and dictate what server
resources should be used, how they should be
configured, and what processes should be run on them.
An overview of this schema can be found
Inspection of these files reveals the EDKII Tools
commands that make up the primary processes for the CI
build: 'stuart_setup', 'stuart_update', and
'stuart_ci_build'. These commands come from the EDKII
Tools PIP modules and are configured as described
below. More documentation on the stuart tools can be
Configuration of the CI process consists of (in order
* command-line arguments passed in via the Pipeline
* a per-package configuration file (e.g. `<package-
name>.mu.yaml`) that is detected by the CI system in
* a global configuration Python module (e.g.
`CISetting.py`) passed in via the command-line
The global configuration file is described in [this
nager.md) from the EDKII Tools documentation. This
configuration is written as a Python module so that
decisions can be made dynamically based on command line
parameters and codebase state.
The per-package configuration file can override most
settings in the global configuration file, but is not
dynamic. This file can be used to skip or customize
tests that may be incompatible with a specific package.
By default, the global configuration will try to run
all tests on all packages.
## CI Test Types
All CI tests are instances of EDKII Tools plugins.
Documentation on the plugin system can be found
ger.md) and [here](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-
ager.md). Upon invocation, each plugin will be passed
the path to the current package under test and a
dictionary containing its targeted configuration, as
assembled from the command line, per-package
configuration, and global configuration.
Note: CI plugins are considered unique from build
plugins and helper plugins, even though some CI plugins
may execute steps of a build.
In the example, these plugins live alongside the code
under test (in the `BaseTools` directory), but may be
moved to the 'edk2-test' repo if that location makes
more sense for the community.
Which of the tests below are passing for all edk2 packages?
Leif has been working on fixing some of the non-ASCII files
and line ending issues. I have been working on some of the
UNI file format issues. If there is a small set of tasks that
would allow more of these tests to be enabled quickly, then
let's get those entered into TianoCore Bugzilla.
### Module Inclusion Test - DscCompleteCheck
This test scans all available modules (via INF files)
and compares them to the package-level DSC file for the
package each module is contained within. The test
considers it an error if any module does not appear in
the `Components` section of at least one package-level
DSC (indicating that it would not be built if the
package were built).
### Code Compilation Test - CompilerPlugin
Once the Module Inclusion Test has verified that all
modules would be built if all package-level DSCs were
built, the Code Compilation Test simply runs through
and builds every package-level DSC on every toolchain
and for every architecture that is supported. Any
module that fails to build is considered an error.
### Host-Based UnitTests - HostUnitTestCompilerPlugin
The [Testing RFC doc](Readme-Testing-RFC.md) has much
more detail on this, but the basic idea is that host-
based unit tests can be compiled against individual
modules and libraries and run on the build agent (in
this case, the Dev Ops build server). The successful
and failing test case results are collected and
included in the final build report.
### GUID Uniqueness Test - GuidCheck
This test works on the collection of all packages
rather than an individual package. It looks at all
FILE_GUIDs and GUIDs declared in DEC files and ensures
that they are unique for the codebase. This prevents,
for example, accidental duplication of GUIDs when using
an existing INF as a template for a new module.
### Cross-Package Dependency Test - DependencyCheck
This test compares the list of all packages used in
INFs files for a given package against a list of
"allowed dependencies" in plugin configuration for that
package. Any module that depends on a disallowed
package will cause a test failure.
### Library Declaration Test - LibraryClassCheck
This test looks at all library header files found in a
package's `Include/Library` directory and ensures that
all files have a matching LibraryClass declaration in
the DEC file for the package. Any missing declarations
will cause a failure.
### Invalid Character Test - CharEncodingCheck
This test scans all files in a package to make sure
that there are no invalid Unicode characters that may
cause build errors in some character
## Next Steps
* Receive community feedback on RFC.
* Determine where this phase makes sense given existing
RFCs from other TianoCore contributors.
* Optimize testing beharior.
* Only run a subset of tests on PRs or individual
* Run full testing either once per day or once every
* Add more tests/capabilities.
* Continue to improve results formatting.
* Continue to improve CI documentation.
* Much of this documentation effort is pending
community feedback on which parts are needed and what
phases are priorities.
From: email@example.com <firstname.lastname@example.org> On Behalf
Of Michael D Kinney via Groups.Io
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2019 1:23 PM
To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
Subject: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] EDK II Continuous Integration
This is a proposal for a first step towards continuous
integration for all TianoCore repositories to help
improve to quality of commits and automate testing and
release processes for all EDK II packages and
This is based on work from a number of EDK II community
members that have provide valuable input and
* Rebecca Cran <mailto:rebecca@...> Jenkins
* Laszlo Ersek <mailto:lersek@...> GitLab
* Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <mailto:philmd@...>
* Sean Brogan <mailto:sean.brogan@...> Azure
Pipelines and HBFA
* Bret Barkelew <mailto:Bret.Barkelew@...>
Azure Pipelines and HBFA
* Jiewen Yao <mailto:jiewen.yao@...> HBFA
The following link is a link to an EDK II WIKI page
that contains a summary of the work to date. Please
provide feedback in the EDK II mailing lists. The WIKI
pages will be updated with input from the entire EDK II
Phase 1 of adding continuous integration is limited to
edk2 repository. Additional repositories will be added
The following changes are proposed:
* Remove EDK II Maintainers write access to edk2
Only EDK II Administrators will continue to have
access, and that should only be used to handle
* EDK II Maintainers use a GitHub Pull Request instead
to commit a patch series to the edk2 repository.
no other changes to the development and review
patch series is prepared in an EDK II maintainer
all commit message requirements met on each patch in
* The edk2 repository only accepts Pull Requests from
of the EDK II Maintainers team. Pull Requests from
* Run pre-commit checks using Azure Pipelines
* If all pre-commit checks pass, then the patch series
committed. The result of this commit must match the
and commit history that would have occurred using the
* If any pre-commit checks fail, then notify the
A typical reason for a failure would be a merge
another pull request that was just processed.
* Limit pre-commit checks execution time to 10 minutes.
* Provide on-demand builds to EDK II Maintainers that
EDK II Maintainers to submit a branch through for the
set of pre-commit checks without submitting a pull
## Pre-Commit Checks in Phase 1
* Run and pass PatchCheck.py with no errors
The following are some additional pre-commit check
ideas that could be quickly added once the initial
version using PatchCheck.py is fully functional.
Please provide feedback on the ones you like and
additional ones you think may improve the quality of
the commits to the edk2 repository.
## Proposed Pre-Commit Checks in Phase 2
* Verify Reviewed-by and Acked-by tags are present with
correct maintainer email addresses
* Verify no non-ASCII characters in modified files
* Verify no binary files in set of modified files
* Verify package dependency rules in modified files
## Proposed Pre-Commit Checks in Phase 3
* Run ECC on modified files
* Verify modified modules/libs build
* Run available host based tests (HBFA) against