Re: [edk2-devel] [RFC] EDK II Continuous Integration Phase 1

["Michael D Kinney" <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>]

Hi Sean,

Which OS/Compiler configurations are currently enabled
for the Code Compilation Test?

I have been working on enabling multiple OS/Compiler
configurations in Azure Pipelines.  There are some tools
that need to be installed for each of these environments.
Examples include NASM, iASL, Python.

For the work you have done, how are these extra tools
installed?  Is it in the YML files or in the Python
scripts.

One critical task is to identify the tools and their
specific versions that the CI system is configured to use.
These configurations should be documented in a Wiki page
and updated as new tools are released and adopted by EDK II.
The inventory of tools used to validate a release should 
Also be documented in a release notes for a stable tag.

Here are the YML files that install the additional tools 
required to support EDK II builds.  I need the source and
versions of these tools to be reviewed and approved.

https://github.com/mdkinney/edk2-ci/blob/master/AzurePipelines/WindowsPrerequisites.yml
https://github.com/mdkinney/edk2-ci/blob/master/AzurePipelines/UbuntuPrerequisites.yml
https://github.com/mdkinney/edk2-ci/blob/master/AzurePipelines/MacOsPrerequisites.yml

Thanks,

Mike

> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On
> Behalf Of Sean via Groups.Io
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2019 7:22 PM
> To: rfc@edk2.groups.io; Kinney, Michael D
> <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; devel@edk2.groups.io
> Cc: Bret Barkelew <Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> 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.
> 
> 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:
> https://github.com/spbrogan/edk2-staging/blob/edk2-
> stuart-ci-latest/Readme-CI-RFC.md
> 
> # CI and PR Gates
> 
> ## Background
> 
> 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
> regular basis.
> 
> ## Strategy
> 
> 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
> repo](https://github.com/spbrogan/edk2-staging.git)
> (branch edk2-stuart-ci-latest) and [Dev Ops
> Pipeline](https://dev.azure.com/tianocore/edk2-ci-
> play/_build?definitionId=12) have been set up.
> 
> Furthermore, this proposal will leverage the TianoCore
> python tools PIP modules:
> [library](https://pypi.org/project/edk2-pytool-
> library/) and
> [extensions](https://pypi.org/project/edk2-pytool-
> extensions/) (with repos located
> [here](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-pytool-
> library) and [here](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-
> pytool-extensions)).
> 
> 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
> [here](https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
> us/azure/devops/pipelines/yaml-schema?view=azure-
> devops&tabs=schema).
> 
> 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
> found [here](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-pytool-
> extensions/blob/master/docs/using.md) and
> [here](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-pytool-
> extensions/blob/master/docs/features/feature_invocables
> .md).
> 
> ## Configuration
> 
> Configuration of the CI process consists of (in order
> of precedence):
> * command-line arguments passed in via the Pipeline
> YAML
> * a per-package configuration file (e.g. `<package-
> name>.mu.yaml`) that is detected by the CI system in
> EDKII Tools.
> * a global configuration Python module (e.g.
> `CISetting.py`) passed in via the command-line
> 
> The global configuration file is described in [this
> readme](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-pytool-
> extensions/blob/master/docs/usability/using_settings_ma
> 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
> [here](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-pytool-
> extensions/blob/master/docs/usability/using_plugin_mana
> ger.md) and [here](https://github.com/tianocore/edk2-
> pytool-
> extensions/blob/master/docs/features/feature_plugin_man
> 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.
> 
> ### 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
> and HostUnitTestDscCompleteCheck
> 
> 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
> sets/localizations.
> 
> ## 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
> commits.
>   * Run full testing either once per day or once every
> several commits.
> * 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.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rfc@edk2.groups.io <rfc@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf
> Of Michael D Kinney via Groups.Io
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2019 1:23 PM
> To: devel@edk2.groups.io; rfc@edk2.groups.io
> Subject: [edk2-rfc] [RFC] EDK II Continuous Integration
> Phase 1
> 
> Hello,
> 
> 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
> platforms.
> 
> This is based on work from a number of EDK II community
> members that have provide valuable input and
> evaluations.
> 
> * Rebecca Cran <mailto:rebecca@bsdio.com> Jenkins
> evaluation
> * Laszlo Ersek <mailto:lersek@redhat.com> GitLab
> evaluation
> * Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <mailto:philmd@redhat.com>
> GitLab evaluation
> * Sean Brogan <mailto:sean.brogan@microsoft.com> Azure
> Pipelines and HBFA
> * Bret Barkelew <mailto:Bret.Barkelew@microsoft.com>
> Azure Pipelines and HBFA
> * Jiewen Yao <mailto:jiewen.yao@intel.com> 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
> community.
> 
> 
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=htt
> ps%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Ftianocore%2Ftianocore.github.io
> %2Fwiki%2FEDK-II-Continuous-
> Integration&amp;data=02%7C01%7Csean.brogan%40microsoft.
> com%7C6f67f169a6c746b4288608d72cbea7b6%7C72f988bf86f141
> af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C637027069686644659&amp;sda
> ta=GR9wN6gP3mJlCTopAaQ2rlzhby1nuF%2BwDVsfFIQAZjA%3D&amp
> ;reserved=0
> 
> Proposal
> ========
> Phase 1 of adding continuous integration is limited to
> the
> edk2 repository.  Additional repositories will be added
> later.
> 
> The following changes are proposed:
> * Remove EDK II Maintainers write access to edk2
> repository.
>   Only EDK II Administrators will continue to have
> write
>   access, and that should only be used to handle
> extraordinary
>   events.
> * EDK II Maintainers use a GitHub Pull Request instead
> of push
>   to commit a patch series to the edk2 repository.
> There are
>   no other changes to the development and review
> process.  The
>   patch series is prepared in an EDK II maintainer
> branch with
>   all commit message requirements met on each patch in
> the series.
> * The edk2 repository only accepts Pull Requests from
> members
>   of the EDK II Maintainers team.  Pull Requests from
> anyone else
>   are rejected.
> * Run pre-commit checks using Azure Pipelines
> * If all pre-commit checks pass, then the patch series
> is auto
>   committed.  The result of this commit must match the
> contents
>   and commit history that would have occurred using the
> previous
>   push operation.
> * If any pre-commit checks fail, then notify the
> submitter.
>   A typical reason for a failure would be a merge
> conflict with
>   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
> to allow
>   EDK II Maintainers to submit a branch through for the
> same
>   set of pre-commit checks without submitting a pull
> request.
> 
> ## 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
> modified
>   modules/libs
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>