Skip to content

Provide the default lcov_merger to all Starlark tests #13983

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
fmeum wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Provide the default lcov_merger to all Starlark tests #13983

fmeum wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

@fmeum
Copy link
Collaborator

@fmeum fmeum commented Sep 13, 2021

Since 5b216b2, all Starlark-defined test rules either need to set the _lcov_merger attribute or fail if run with bazel coverage. This is fixed by attaching the default lcov merger as a late-bound default to all Starlark rules via a new attribute and falling back to that attribute in the TestActionBuilder.

This commit ensures backwards compatibility is maintained with existing Starlark test rules that set the _lcov_merger attribute. This is also verified in the included integration test.

Fixes #13978.

@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes label Sep 13, 2021
@fmeum fmeum changed the title Provide the lcov_merger to all Starlark tests Provide the default lcov_merger to all Starlark tests Sep 13, 2021
@fmeum fmeum force-pushed the fix-custom-test-coverage branch from 5d3508b to 737ad9d Compare September 13, 2021 10:08
@fmeum fmeum mentioned this pull request Sep 13, 2021
Closed
@fmeum
Provide the default lcov_merger to all Starlark tests
43191ee 
Since 5b216b2, all Starlark-defined test rules either need to set the
`_lcov_merger` attribute or fail if run with `bazel coverage`. This is
fixed by attaching the default lcov merger as a late-bound default to
all Starlark rules via a new attribute and falling back to that
attribute in the TestActionBuilder.

This commit ensures backwards compatibility is maintained with existing
Starlark test rules that set the `_lcov_merger` attribute. This is also
verified in the included integration test.

Fixes bazelbuild#13978.
@fmeum fmeum force-pushed the fix-custom-test-coverage branch from 737ad9d to 43191ee Compare September 13, 2021 11:55
@fmeum fmeum mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2021
Closed
@fmeum
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fmeum commented Nov 24, 2021

@oquenchil Would you be able to take a look? The issue this resolves is labeled with team-Rules-CPP.

@fmeum fmeum mentioned this pull request Nov 28, 2021
Closed
9 tasks
@meteorcloudy meteorcloudy requested a review from c-mita November 29, 2021 08:46
@meteorcloudy
Copy link
Member

meteorcloudy commented Nov 29, 2021

@c-mita Can you help review this change?

@c-mita
Copy link
Member

c-mita commented Nov 29, 2021

Unfortunately, I can't accept this PR as is.
Internally, things are setup a little differently for coverage collection. We use a different collect_coverage.sh script and generally do not set the :lcov_attribute; this change does not play well with the internal setup.

I think the best (only?) way to handle this at the moment is by changing Bazel's collect_coverage.sh to simply do nothing if the LCOV_MERGER variable has not been set.

@fmeum
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fmeum commented Nov 29, 2021

@c-mita I see the problem. While your proposed solution does resolve the linked issue, it would mean that there would still be no way for Starlark tests to access the merge as a late-bound attribute.

How about the following path forward:

  1. You make the required change to collect_coverage.sh to resolve the release blocking Custom test rule without _lcov_merger attribute always fails under bazel coverage #13978 and I close the current PR.
  2. Someone who is familiar with Google's internal coverage setup provides some guidance on either Expose CoverageOutputGenerator's label in a configuration #8736 or _lcov_merger late-bound test attribute #10642 on how a solution to these issues could look like that would have a chance to be accepted.
  3. I will look into providing such a solution as a separate PR.

@c-mita
Copy link
Member

c-mita commented Nov 30, 2021

I'm ok with this approach; I've got a change ready to unblock the build.
It isn't ideal, but it's a way forward.

@c-mita c-mita closed this Nov 30, 2021
@c-mita c-mita mentioned this pull request Dec 1, 2021
Closed
@fmeum fmeum deleted the fix-custom-test-coverage branch January 15, 2022 10:13
@fmeum fmeum mentioned this pull request Jan 15, 2022
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@c-mita c-mita Awaiting requested review from c-mita

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

cla: yes

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Custom test rule without _lcov_merger attribute always fails under bazel coverage

3 participants

@fmeum @meteorcloudy @c-mita