{"thread":{"id":"61377","subject":"[PATCH] gitlab-ci: add smoke test for fuzzers","startedAt":"2024-04-29T06:13:28Z","lastAt":"2024-05-06T18:52:06Z","messageCount":6,"participants":["Patrick Steinhardt","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":true,"patchVersion":1,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"493588","messageId":"01fb94999f8e2014ba4d09ce7451a4f5d315ee72.1714371146.git.ps@pks.im","threadId":"61377","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"[PATCH] gitlab-ci: add smoke test for fuzzers","fromName":"Patrick Steinhardt","fromEmail":"ps@pks.im","sentAt":"2024-04-29T06:13:23Z","receivedAt":"2024-04-29T06:13:28Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"ps@pks.im","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/4056630?v=4"},"body":"Our GitLab CI setup has a test gap where the fuzzers aren't exercised at\nall. Add a smoke test, similar to the one we have in GitHub Workflows.\n\nSigned-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt \n---\n\nAs identified by Junio in .\n\nPatrick\n\n .gitlab-ci.yml | 9 +++++++++\n 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)\n\ndiff --git a/.gitlab-ci.yml b/.gitlab-ci.yml\nindex c0fa2fe90b..33d53b3ec7 100644\n--- a/.gitlab-ci.yml\n+++ b/.gitlab-ci.yml\n@@ -93,6 +93,15 @@ test:osx:\n - t/failed-test-artifacts\n when: on_failure\n \n+test:fuzz-smoke-tests:\n+ image: ubuntu:latest\n+ variables:\n+ CC: clang\n+ before_script:\n+ - ./ci/install-docker-dependencies.sh\n+ script:\n+ - ./ci/run-build-and-minimal-fuzzers.sh\n+\n static-analysis:\n image: ubuntu:22.04\n variables:\n-- \n2.45.0-rc1\n\n"},{"id":"493589","messageId":"Zi86uFE5RlDG2RFN@tanuki","threadId":"61377","inReplyTo":"01fb94999f8e2014ba4d09ce7451a4f5d315ee72.1714371146.git.ps@pks.im","subject":"Re: [PATCH] gitlab-ci: add smoke test for fuzzers","fromName":"Patrick Steinhardt","fromEmail":"ps@pks.im","sentAt":"2024-04-29T06:14:16Z","receivedAt":"2024-04-29T06:14:20Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"ps@pks.im","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/4056630?v=4"},"body":"On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 08:13:23AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:\n> Our GitLab CI setup has a test gap where the fuzzers aren't exercised at\n> all. Add a smoke test, similar to the one we have in GitHub Workflows.\n> \n> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt \n> ---\n> \n> As identified by Junio in .\n> \n> Patrick\n\nI forgot to add the link to a successful run of this job:\nhttps://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/git/-/jobs/6735705569\n\nPatrick\n"},{"id":"493642","messageId":"xmqqfrv4yyb6.fsf@gitster.g","threadId":"61377","inReplyTo":"Zi86uFE5RlDG2RFN@tanuki","subject":"Re: [PATCH] gitlab-ci: add smoke test for fuzzers","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2024-04-29T15:37:49Z","receivedAt":"2024-04-29T15:37:57Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Patrick Steinhardt writes:\n\n> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 08:13:23AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:\n>> Our GitLab CI setup has a test gap where the fuzzers aren't exercised at\n>> all. Add a smoke test, similar to the one we have in GitHub Workflows.\n>> \n>> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt \n>> ---\n>> \n>> As identified by Junio in .\n>> \n>> Patrick\n>\n> I forgot to add the link to a successful run of this job:\n> https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/git/-/jobs/6735705569\n\nThanks. I wonder if we can somehow automate a change like this.\n\nSeeing how simple this fix has become thanks to the use of\nbefore_script/script pair that merely point at ci/*.sh scripts,\nperhaps we have already extracted enough commonalities as a set of\nshell scripts in ci/ hierarchy. I wonder if we can have a common\n\"source\" that is \"compiled\" into .gitlab-ci.yml and its counterpart\nfor GitHub Actions?\n\nOr perhaps a linter that can say things like \"ah, you are adding\nthis new test to one, but not touching the other, shouldn't you?\",\nand \"you are tweaking this existing test in one, but shouldn't you\nbe doing the same to the other?\"\n\n\n"},{"id":"493722","messageId":"ZjBz_V31u_9CfXDn@tanuki","threadId":"61377","inReplyTo":"xmqqfrv4yyb6.fsf@gitster.g","subject":"Re: [PATCH] gitlab-ci: add smoke test for fuzzers","fromName":"Patrick Steinhardt","fromEmail":"ps@pks.im","sentAt":"2024-04-30T04:30:53Z","receivedAt":"2024-04-30T04:31:00Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"ps@pks.im","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/4056630?v=4"},"body":"On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 08:37:49AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:\n> Patrick Steinhardt writes:\n> \n> > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 08:13:23AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:\n> >> Our GitLab CI setup has a test gap where the fuzzers aren't exercised at\n> >> all. Add a smoke test, similar to the one we have in GitHub Workflows.\n> >> \n> >> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt \n> >> ---\n> >> \n> >> As identified by Junio in .\n> >> \n> >> Patrick\n> >\n> > I forgot to add the link to a successful run of this job:\n> > https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/git/-/jobs/6735705569\n> \n> Thanks. I wonder if we can somehow automate a change like this.\n> \n> Seeing how simple this fix has become thanks to the use of\n> before_script/script pair that merely point at ci/*.sh scripts,\n> perhaps we have already extracted enough commonalities as a set of\n> shell scripts in ci/ hierarchy. I wonder if we can have a common\n> \"source\" that is \"compiled\" into .gitlab-ci.yml and its counterpart\n> for GitHub Actions?\n> \n> Or perhaps a linter that can say things like \"ah, you are adding\n> this new test to one, but not touching the other, shouldn't you?\",\n> and \"you are tweaking this existing test in one, but shouldn't you\n> be doing the same to the other?\"\n\nWe probably could, yeah. The question is whether it would really be\nworth it in the end. GitLab CI is still a relatively new addition, and\nthus it needs to catch up with what GitHub Workflows has. But once that\nis done I don't expect there to be a ton of changes to the CI setup, and\nthe few new additions that we gain once in a while should be relatively\neasy to spot during review.\n\nSo if anybody is up for it then I'm happy to review that. But I don't\nthink there would be enough value to do it myself.\n\nPatrick\n"},{"id":"494142","messageId":"ZjisGhU66kDKkZsZ@tanuki","threadId":"61377","inReplyTo":"01fb94999f8e2014ba4d09ce7451a4f5d315ee72.1714371146.git.ps@pks.im","subject":"Re: [PATCH] gitlab-ci: add smoke test for fuzzers","fromName":"Patrick Steinhardt","fromEmail":"ps@pks.im","sentAt":"2024-05-06T10:08:26Z","receivedAt":"2024-05-06T10:08:33Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"ps@pks.im","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/4056630?v=4"},"body":"On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 08:13:23AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:\n> Our GitLab CI setup has a test gap where the fuzzers aren't exercised at\n> all. Add a smoke test, similar to the one we have in GitHub Workflows.\n> \n> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt \n\nJunio, I haven't seen this topic getting picked up in your \"What's\ncooking\" report yet. Is this intentional or did it simply fall through\nthe cracks?\n\nThanks!\n\nPatrick\n"},{"id":"494179","messageId":"xmqqy18mydrh.fsf@gitster.g","threadId":"61377","inReplyTo":"ZjisGhU66kDKkZsZ@tanuki","subject":"Re: [PATCH] gitlab-ci: add smoke test for fuzzers","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"gitster@pobox.com","sentAt":"2024-05-06T18:52:02Z","receivedAt":"2024-05-06T18:52:06Z","isPatch":true,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Patrick Steinhardt writes:\n\n> On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 08:13:23AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:\n>> Our GitLab CI setup has a test gap where the fuzzers aren't exercised at\n>> all. Add a smoke test, similar to the one we have in GitHub Workflows.\n>> \n>> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt \n>\n> Junio, I haven't seen this topic getting picked up in your \"What's\n> cooking\" report yet. Is this intentional or did it simply fall through\n> the cracks?\n\nThe latter. Thanks for a ping that is designed to make it easy to\nfind the patch (by going to the message it is a response to).\n"}]}