[RFC PATCH v1 12/12] apps: lc-compliance: Add multi-stream tests
Barnabás Pőcze
pobrn at protonmail.com
Tue Jan 7 09:43:13 CET 2025
Hi
2024. december 24., kedd 17:42 keltezéssel, Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham at ideasonboard.com> írta:
> Quoting Barnabás Pőcze (2024-12-20 15:08:58)
> > Rename the `SingleStream` test to `SimpleCapture`, and
> > extend it to support using multiple roles. And instantiate
> > another test suite from the `SimpleCapture` test that
> > tests multiple streams in one capture session.
> >
> > Co-developed-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo.mondi at ideasonboard.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Jacopo Mondi <jacopo.mondi at ideasonboard.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Barnabás Pőcze <pobrn at protonmail.com>
> > ---
> > src/apps/lc-compliance/tests/capture_test.cpp | 85 +++++++++++--------
> > 1 file changed, 48 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/src/apps/lc-compliance/tests/capture_test.cpp b/src/apps/lc-compliance/tests/capture_test.cpp
> > index c382fcf47..8ea422f0d 100644
> > --- a/src/apps/lc-compliance/tests/capture_test.cpp
> > +++ b/src/apps/lc-compliance/tests/capture_test.cpp
> > @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
> >
> > #include "capture.h"
> >
> > -#include <iostream>
> > +#include <sstream>
> >
> > #include <gtest/gtest.h>
> >
> > @@ -18,19 +18,10 @@ namespace {
> >
> > using namespace libcamera;
> >
> > -const int NUMREQUESTS[] = { 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89 };
> > -
> > -const StreamRole ROLES[] = {
> > - StreamRole::Raw,
> > - StreamRole::StillCapture,
> > - StreamRole::VideoRecording,
> > - StreamRole::Viewfinder
> > -};
> > -
> > -class SingleStream : public testing::TestWithParam<std::tuple<StreamRole, int>>
> > +class SimpleCapture : public testing::TestWithParam<std::tuple<std::vector<StreamRole>, int>>
> > {
> > public:
> > - static std::string nameParameters(const testing::TestParamInfo<SingleStream::ParamType> &info);
> > + static std::string nameParameters(const testing::TestParamInfo<SimpleCapture::ParamType> &info);
> >
> > protected:
> > void SetUp() override;
> > @@ -43,7 +34,7 @@ protected:
> > * We use gtest's SetUp() and TearDown() instead of constructor and destructor
> > * in order to be able to assert on them.
> > */
> > -void SingleStream::SetUp()
> > +void SimpleCapture::SetUp()
> > {
> > Environment *env = Environment::get();
> >
> > @@ -52,7 +43,7 @@ void SingleStream::SetUp()
> > ASSERT_EQ(camera_->acquire(), 0);
> > }
> >
> > -void SingleStream::TearDown()
> > +void SimpleCapture::TearDown()
> > {
> > if (!camera_)
> > return;
> > @@ -61,19 +52,17 @@ void SingleStream::TearDown()
> > camera_.reset();
> > }
> >
> > -std::string SingleStream::nameParameters(const testing::TestParamInfo<SingleStream::ParamType> &info)
> > +std::string SimpleCapture::nameParameters(const testing::TestParamInfo<SimpleCapture::ParamType> &info)
> > {
> > - std::map<StreamRole, std::string> rolesMap = {
> > - { StreamRole::Raw, "Raw" },
> > - { StreamRole::StillCapture, "StillCapture" },
> > - { StreamRole::VideoRecording, "VideoRecording" },
> > - { StreamRole::Viewfinder, "Viewfinder" }
> > - };
> > + const auto &[roles, numRequests] = info.param;
> > + std::ostringstream ss;
> >
> > - std::string roleName = rolesMap[std::get<0>(info.param)];
> > - std::string numRequestsName = std::to_string(std::get<1>(info.param));
> > + for (StreamRole r : roles)
> > + ss << r << '_';
> >
> > - return roleName + "_" + numRequestsName;
> > + ss << '_' << numRequests;
> > +
> > + return std::move(ss).str();
> > }
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -83,13 +72,13 @@ std::string SingleStream::nameParameters(const testing::TestParamInfo<SingleStre
> > * failure is a camera that completes less requests than the number of requests
> > * queued.
> > */
> > -TEST_P(SingleStream, Capture)
> > +TEST_P(SimpleCapture, Capture)
> > {
> > - auto [role, numRequests] = GetParam();
> > + const auto &[roles, numRequests] = GetParam();
> >
> > CaptureBalanced capture(camera_);
> >
> > - capture.configure(std::array{ role });
> > + capture.configure(roles);
> >
> > capture.capture(numRequests);
> > }
> > @@ -101,14 +90,14 @@ TEST_P(SingleStream, Capture)
> > * a camera that does not clean up correctly in its error path but is only
> > * tested by single-capture applications.
> > */
> > -TEST_P(SingleStream, CaptureStartStop)
> > +TEST_P(SimpleCapture, CaptureStartStop)
> > {
> > - auto [role, numRequests] = GetParam();
> > + const auto &[roles, numRequests] = GetParam();
> > unsigned int numRepeats = 3;
> >
> > CaptureBalanced capture(camera_);
> >
> > - capture.configure(std::array{ role });
> > + capture.configure(roles);
> >
> > for (unsigned int starts = 0; starts < numRepeats; starts++)
> > capture.capture(numRequests);
> > @@ -121,21 +110,43 @@ TEST_P(SingleStream, CaptureStartStop)
> > * is a camera that does not handle cancelation of buffers coming back from the
> > * video device while stopping.
> > */
> > -TEST_P(SingleStream, UnbalancedStop)
> > +TEST_P(SimpleCapture, UnbalancedStop)
> > {
> > - auto [role, numRequests] = GetParam();
> > + const auto &[roles, numRequests] = GetParam();
> >
> > CaptureUnbalanced capture(camera_);
> >
> > - capture.configure(std::array{ role });
> > + capture.configure(roles);
> >
> > capture.capture(numRequests);
> > }
> >
> > -INSTANTIATE_TEST_SUITE_P(CaptureTests,
> > - SingleStream,
> > - testing::Combine(testing::ValuesIn(ROLES),
> > +const int NUMREQUESTS[] = { 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89 };
>
> Not from your series, but I'm not sure I understand the full relevance
> of why we use this sequence of 10 tests for each type. Do we really need
> to run each test 10 times for each of these combinations? Running
> lc-compliance seems to take a long time waiting for each of these
> combinations and I can't see what value that really adds yet.
You're right. It takes a bit of time to run, this can be a problem. To be honest
I just took these numbers from the single stream case. I believe the numbers
follow the Fibonacci sequence, so I am not sure if there is any more intent behind
them. I couldn't find anything in the git history in any case.
Regards,
Barnabás Pőcze
>
> I could understand 1, 2, 3, 5 as variants that might or might not stream
> based on minimum buffer requirements, but from there - I can't see what
> difference we get from 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89. I'd be tempted to chop
> this down to just something like { 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 30, 90 }; or somehow
> more aligned to what we actually want to test.
>
> Especially when we get to the multi-stream role combinations, where we
> might want to do different combinations such as a sequences that do not
> have a buffer in one of the streams.
>
> But aside from that which is more of a higher level discussion, I like
> this patch simplifying things and handling / using testing::Combine to
> create / manage the test suites.
>
>
>
> Actions from the any discussions on the above could easily be on top.
>
> Reviewed-by: Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham at ideasonboard.com>
> > +
> > +const std::vector<StreamRole> SINGLEROLES[] = {
> > + { StreamRole::Raw, },
> > + { StreamRole::StillCapture, },
> > + { StreamRole::VideoRecording, },
> > + { StreamRole::Viewfinder, },
> > +};
> > +
> > +const std::vector<StreamRole> MULTIROLES[] = {
> > + { StreamRole::Raw, StreamRole::StillCapture },
> > + { StreamRole::Raw, StreamRole::VideoRecording },
> > + { StreamRole::StillCapture, StreamRole::VideoRecording },
> > + { StreamRole::VideoRecording, StreamRole::VideoRecording },
> > +};
> > +
> > +INSTANTIATE_TEST_SUITE_P(SingleStream,
> > + SimpleCapture,
> > + testing::Combine(testing::ValuesIn(SINGLEROLES),
> > + testing::ValuesIn(NUMREQUESTS)),
> > + SimpleCapture::nameParameters);
> > +
> > +INSTANTIATE_TEST_SUITE_P(MultiStream,
> > + SimpleCapture,
> > + testing::Combine(testing::ValuesIn(MULTIROLES),
> > testing::ValuesIn(NUMREQUESTS)),
> > - SingleStream::nameParameters);
> > + SimpleCapture::nameParameters);
> >
> > } /* namespace */
> > --
> > 2.47.1
> >
> >
>
More information about the libcamera-devel
mailing list