C API for UptaneCycle and campaigns #1263

eu-siemann · 2019-07-23T11:46:56Z

No description provided.

eu-siemann · 2019-07-23T11:47:39Z

I still need to do something with absolute paths in test C app.

pattivacek

Seems reasonable!

pattivacek · 2019-07-24T07:23:38Z

src/libaktualizr-c/libaktualizr-c.cc

+  try {
+    auto r = a->CampaignCheck().get();
+    if (!r.campaigns.empty()) {
+      return new Campaign(r.campaigns[0]);


Is it fair to assume there will never be multiple campaigns? It would indeed be confusing if there were, but a comment to state the assumption might be worthwhile.

It's not supported at the moment, so I think it's worth keeping it simple here. I'll add a comment.

pattivacek · 2019-07-24T07:25:31Z

src/libaktualizr-c/test/Makefile

+	$(CC) -c -o $@ $< $(CFLAGS)
+
+api-test: $(OBJ)
+	$(CC) -o $@ $^ $(CFLAGS) $(LIBS)


Why not use cmake? And either way, is there a way to integrate the test into the ctest framework?

I started with having this test app completely separate, to be sure that linking works without any implicit cmake magic. But I guess I'll use cmake and add it to the ctest now.

pattivacek · 2019-07-26T07:18:35Z

src/libaktualizr/package_manager/CMakeLists.txt

@@ -17,9 +17,6 @@ add_aktualizr_test(NAME packagemanagerfake SOURCES packagemanagerfake_test.cc)
 # Debian backend
 if(BUILD_DEB)
    set_property(SOURCE packagemanagerfactory.cc packagemanagerfactory_test.cc PROPERTY COMPILE_DEFINITIONS BUILD_DEB)


We probably don't need to set this BUILD_DEB definition here anymore, right? In fact, is BUILD_DEB meaningful at all anymore? In CI it's built by default, and if it brings in no dependencies, there's hardly a reason not to just have it always on.

That's a fair point, though we'd ship a code path that calls dpkg on yocto systems where it doesn't make sense. I don't know if the cost of keeping it (low, I think) warrants larger executables and potential bug surface.

Probably true. Perhaps we should disable by default on CI and only enable it as necessary?

Our approach on CI has been to enable all flags, so that everything can be tested at once. The things that are not covered tend to not compile after refactors.

Also, some unrelated useful tests use the Debian mode. For example memory_test. We'll probably migrate them when we can though.

Fair enough. I have no objection.

@patrickvacek, @lbonn Sorry, I'm a bit confused, what's your conclusion on that?

I think just keep it as is?

Cool, that's what I thought, just wanted to be sure.

Yes, sorry for the distraction!

mike-sul · 2019-07-26T08:44:06Z

src/libaktualizr-c/libaktualizr-c.cc

+    std::cerr << "Creating exception: " << e.what() << std::endl;
+    return NULL;
+  }
+  return a;


Maybe, there will be a need/requirement to return some status/error code to am app using the C version of libaktualizr, otherwise the only way to find out what went wrong is by parsing stderr.

@mike-sul Absolutely. But first, we'll need to make sure that exceptions thrown by libaktualizr are consistent and meaningful. I plan to work on that next.

codecov-io · 2019-07-26T12:53:07Z

Codecov Report

Merging #1263 into master will decrease coverage by 0.65%.
The diff coverage is 1.75%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1263      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage    79.7%   79.04%   -0.66%     
==========================================
  Files         173      175       +2     
  Lines       10301    10343      +42     
==========================================
- Hits         8210     8176      -34     
- Misses       2091     2167      +76

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/libaktualizr/primary/aktualizr.h	`100% <ø> (ø)`	⬆️
src/libaktualizr-c/test/api-test.c	`0% <0%> (ø)`
src/libaktualizr-c/libaktualizr-c.cc	`0% <0%> (ø)`
src/libaktualizr/package_manager/debianmanager.cc	`100% <100%> (ø)`	⬆️
src/libaktualizr/package_manager/ostreemanager.cc	`76.27% <0%> (-2.97%)`	⬇️
src/libaktualizr/uptane/directorrepository.cc	`95.71% <0%> (-1.43%)`	⬇️
src/libaktualizr/storage/sql_utils.h	`83.09% <0%> (-1.41%)`	⬇️
src/libaktualizr/storage/sqlstorage.cc	`74.74% <0%> (-0.9%)`	⬇️
src/libaktualizr/primary/sotauptaneclient.cc	`91.29% <0%> (-0.62%)`	⬇️
... and 1 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 8c8877f...4525bca. Read the comment docs.

Signed-off-by: Eugene Smirnov <evgenii.smirnov@here.com>

We shouldn't expect Config object to be alive after returning from Aktualizr constructor. As uptane_client_ uses Config in its destructor, we need to move the member declaration higher. Signed-off-by: Eugene Smirnov <evgenii.smirnov@here.com>

API of libdpkg is unstable and its usage is discouraged for purposes other than internal. It also prevents building libaktualizr as a shared library. As getInstalledPackages() functionality of debian package manager seems to be unused, we will avoid reimplementing it for now. Signed-off-by: Eugene Smirnov <evgenii.smirnov@here.com>

lbonn · 2019-07-29T07:17:16Z

include/libaktualizr-c.h

+void Aktualizr_destroy(Aktualizr *a);
+
+Campaign *Aktualizr_campaign_check(Aktualizr *a);
+int Aktualizr_campaign_accept(Aktualizr *a, Campaign *c);


That's a bit annoying that we have to pass an Aktualizr instance to all of these. Would be handy if Campaign contained a pointer. But that might need changes in the C++ object, don't know if we want that.

I see no problem in this, tbh. That's pretty much idiomatic C and is equivalent to Aktualizr->CampaignAccept(Campaign *c). If we do just a single arg here, I would expect our C++ API to also change to Campaign->Accept(). I'm not sure if it makes it nicer, though.

Ok I think you're right.

On second thought, maybe it's not a bad thing to make those calls members of Campaign object. This way, we would prevent passing a campaign_id that belongs to another Aktualizr instance (a hypothetical situation, but still). WDYT, @lbonn @patrickvacek @mike-sul ?

If it doesn't require changes to the C++ code, then that seems like the way to go. Even if it does, that seems to me to be a slightly better way to go.

mike-sul · 2019-07-30T07:12:31Z

src/libaktualizr-c/test/api-test.c

+    err = Aktualizr_campaign_accept(a, c);
+    Aktualizr_campaign_free(c);
+    if (err) {
+      return EXIT_FAILURE;


Will the aktualizr instance be properly tear-downed and freed in this case as well as in case of line #23 ? Or it's not important taking into account that the process is going to die anyway ?

It won't, I forgot how to write proper C ;) But I'm rewriting this piece anyway

eu-siemann · 2019-07-30T18:38:01Z

Would you mind guys merging this in the current state? It looks like doing the proper test for that will take me a bit longer.

lbonn

Even if some comments are unresolved, this looks mostly fine and dropping libdpkg is already good.

So we can probably merge it and continue to work on it in other PRs.

eu-siemann · 2019-08-02T14:05:05Z

@lbonn Cool, I'll merge it then and address the comments about the test app in the next PR.
We also can discuss again if we want to change the Campaigns API, I'm still not sure about that.

eu-siemann requested review from balajirrao, koshelev, rdanitz, lbonn and pattivacek July 23, 2019 11:46

eu-siemann force-pushed the feat/c-api branch 2 times, most recently from 2dc475d to 1ec2ecf Compare July 23, 2019 11:52

pattivacek reviewed Jul 24, 2019

View reviewed changes

eu-siemann force-pushed the feat/c-api branch from a1bffa3 to c42f080 Compare July 25, 2019 16:03

pattivacek reviewed Jul 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

mike-sul reviewed Jul 26, 2019

View reviewed changes

eu-siemann force-pushed the feat/c-api branch from c42f080 to c8275eb Compare July 26, 2019 12:53

eu-siemann force-pushed the feat/c-api branch 3 times, most recently from ed8b59f to b5a0d4f Compare July 26, 2019 14:15

Eugene Smirnov added 3 commits July 26, 2019 16:59

C API: UptaneCycle and campaigns

763eecb

Signed-off-by: Eugene Smirnov <evgenii.smirnov@here.com>

Store a copy of Config in Aktualizr object

da645c8

We shouldn't expect Config object to be alive after returning from Aktualizr constructor. As uptane_client_ uses Config in its destructor, we need to move the member declaration higher. Signed-off-by: Eugene Smirnov <evgenii.smirnov@here.com>

eu-siemann force-pushed the feat/c-api branch from b5a0d4f to 4525bca Compare July 26, 2019 14:59

lbonn reviewed Jul 29, 2019

View reviewed changes

mike-sul reviewed Jul 30, 2019

View reviewed changes

lbonn approved these changes Aug 2, 2019

View reviewed changes

eu-siemann merged commit 4325122 into master Aug 2, 2019

eu-siemann deleted the feat/c-api branch August 2, 2019 14:05

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

C API for UptaneCycle and campaigns #1263

C API for UptaneCycle and campaigns #1263

eu-siemann commented Jul 23, 2019

eu-siemann commented Jul 23, 2019

pattivacek left a comment

pattivacek Jul 24, 2019

eu-siemann Jul 24, 2019

pattivacek Jul 24, 2019

eu-siemann Jul 24, 2019

pattivacek Jul 26, 2019

lbonn Jul 26, 2019

pattivacek Jul 26, 2019

lbonn Jul 26, 2019

pattivacek Jul 26, 2019

eu-siemann Jul 26, 2019

lbonn Jul 26, 2019

eu-siemann Jul 26, 2019

pattivacek Jul 26, 2019

mike-sul Jul 26, 2019

eu-siemann Jul 26, 2019

codecov-io commented Jul 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading

lbonn Jul 29, 2019

eu-siemann Jul 30, 2019 •

edited

Loading

lbonn Jul 30, 2019

eu-siemann Jul 30, 2019

pattivacek Jul 31, 2019

mike-sul Jul 30, 2019

eu-siemann Jul 30, 2019

eu-siemann commented Jul 30, 2019

lbonn left a comment

eu-siemann commented Aug 2, 2019

C API for UptaneCycle and campaigns #1263

C API for UptaneCycle and campaigns #1263

Conversation

eu-siemann commented Jul 23, 2019

eu-siemann commented Jul 23, 2019

pattivacek left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codecov-io commented Jul 26, 2019 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eu-siemann Jul 30, 2019 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eu-siemann commented Jul 30, 2019

lbonn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

eu-siemann commented Aug 2, 2019

codecov-io commented Jul 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading

eu-siemann Jul 30, 2019 •

edited

Loading