Skip to content

Initial Unit Testing and Automation #77

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
Open
cwo3990 wants to merge 25 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Initial Unit Testing and Automation #77

cwo3990 wants to merge 25 commits into from

Conversation

@cwo3990
Copy link
Contributor

@cwo3990 cwo3990 commented Dec 2, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Description

This PR creates the initial automated unit tests for the operator and Ichor projects. It also introduces automation for running these unit tests via GitHub Actions and uploading the results.

Closes #75

Metrics

  • PR Confidence value(1 ~ 5): 3
    • Not sure how well the automation for creating a test report will work

@cwo3990
added initial common tests for s_list, base config, log_config, and s…
ae0a773 
…ocket config, ER_V config, Scorbot, Ichor config, and Ichor arm classes. Created main files for all tests in common, ER_V, and Ichor. Updated makefiles at root and in common, ER_V, and Ichor to remove test building since they are located in another file. Added makefiles for the tests for common, ER_V, and Ichor
@cwo3990
fixed issue with coverage being included in regular executable and is…
be7ba90 
…sues with compiling the tests for the erv and Ichor
@cwo3990
initial version of github action for running unit tests
4b51ca4
cwo3990 added 18 commits December 2, 2025 01:41
@cwo3990
checking something
5b8fb88
@cwo3990
checking something else
22f5e4d
@cwo3990
checking another thing to confirm the makefiles are there
39c5b1e
@cwo3990
forgot to checkout driver submodule
4e82541
@cwo3990
had a dumb moment and didn't type my make target names right
562e220
@cwo3990
trying to get the test report workflow running
96aa0f3
@cwo3990
hopefully this works
bdde5f4
@cwo3990
trying something
b1108e0
@cwo3990
going out on a limb trying this
884ba0c
@cwo3990
trying to listen to all workflow completed triggers
d298bbc
@cwo3990
trying to debug
9f593de
@cwo3990
another debug attempt
d9deb91
@cwo3990
Trying something new
ffb6490
@cwo3990
Testing to see if the test report action has been configured correctl…
9b9f4e8 
…y. Temporarily changing the trigger so this can be tested.
@cwo3990
messed up the run-tests action. According to AI, we will need to merg…
40103bd 
…e the PR in order to fully test the Test Report action
@cwo3990
forgot to commit some changes
901b71a
@cwo3990
Updated README to include info on how to run tests and generate repor…
6cb9a44 
…t. Added lcov to dev tools for dev container for generating test coverage report. This is currently not being run in the GitHub Action.
@cwo3990
updated gitignore to ignore coverage related files
511a072
rtyocum
rtyocum requested changes Dec 2, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@rtyocum rtyocum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Mostly looks good, just a few small semantics

README.md Outdated
make test_all

# Individual make commands
make common_test
Copy link
Contributor

@rtyocum rtyocum Dec 2, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

move from test to test

hiromon0125
hiromon0125 reviewed Dec 9, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@hiromon0125 hiromon0125 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lgtm
Not this PR but I think we should look into extracting metrics from these tools

@cwo3990 cwo3990 requested a review from rtyocum December 10, 2025 21:01
@cwo3990
Copy link
Contributor Author

cwo3990 commented Dec 10, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Lgtm Not this PR but I think we should look into extracting metrics from these tools

@hiromon0125 Absolutely agree. As far as collecting code coverage metrics goes, I added a TODO comment at the end of run-tests.yml to decide between a few different tools for creating code coverage reports. They all have similar features and one of the major differences between them is that some can store results in the cloud elsewhere, while others would run locally inside the action and store their outputs as an artifact for the action. We will have to discuss our options as a team because some of these require the organization to set them up for the repo as opposed to one of us trying to do it individually (I already looked into trying to use codecov on my own)

hiromon0125
hiromon0125 approved these changes Dec 11, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@hiromon0125 hiromon0125 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@hiromon0125 hiromon0125 hiromon0125 approved these changes

@infinityspike infinityspike Awaiting requested review from infinityspike

@frey808 frey808 Awaiting requested review from frey808

@rtyocum rtyocum Awaiting requested review from rtyocum

Requested changes must be addressed to merge this pull request.

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Operator Unit tests

4 participants

@cwo3990 @rtyocum @hiromon0125