-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.9k
test: dump debug information if http request to firecracker fails #5233
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.
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
Merged
roypat
merged 5 commits into
firecracker-microvm:main
from
roypat:connection-loss-debugging
May 30, 2025
Merged
test: dump debug information if http request to firecracker fails #5233
roypat
merged 5 commits into
firecracker-microvm:main
from
roypat:connection-loss-debugging
May 30, 2025
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sometimes, we intermittently see `ConnectionRefused` errors when doing http requests to the firecracker API in integration tests. Have the test framework dump relevant logs in these cases. Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
If firecracker already died, then the pid file might not exist anymore, and we get a NoSuchProcess exception from thread_backtraces(). This can be confusing when debugging failures, because its a secondary error that only happens during error handling of the actual reason we're dumping debug information in the first place. Fix this by simply returning an empty list of threads in this case. Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #5233 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 82.89% 82.94% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 250 250
Lines 26965 26965
==========================================
+ Hits 22353 22367 +14
+ Misses 4612 4598 -14
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Make it clear whose creation we are waiting for. Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
In Microvm.spawn(), we try to wait for the firecracker process to initialize itself and become ready to server requests. We have multiple checks of varying fidelity in there, and they can be strictly ordered by this based on what they wait for: e.g. if we wait for SSH availability (guest userspace is ready), there is no point to _also_ wait for firecracker's startup message in the logs, as that is always printed before SSH becomes available. Thus clean this logic up to only do the one check that has the highest fidelity in any given setup. While we're at it, update/move some comments. Then, improve the check for API server readiness to wait for the log message that signals completion of API server initialization, instead of just waiting for socket file creation (which happens before we are actually ready to accept connections on it). Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
Some negative tests check for a failure mode that happens before we can print the "API server started" log message, which then causes issues in Microvm.spawn(). Work around this by adjusting some except clauses (it seems that even in the past we ran into this issue due to the old "does api socket file exist" check), or setting the log level to WARN, which also disables the "api server started" check. A special case if the describe snapshot version check, which runs into issues because the "api server started" log message is fairly new (1.12), and some older firecrackers do not print it. Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy <[email protected]>
ShadowCurse
reviewed
May 30, 2025
ShadowCurse
approved these changes
May 30, 2025
pb8o
reviewed
May 30, 2025
pb8o
approved these changes
May 30, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Sometimes, we intermittently see
ConnectionRefused
errors when doinghttp requests to the firecracker API in integration tests. Have the test
framework dump relevant logs in these cases.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Roy [email protected]## Changes
...
Reason
...
License Acceptance
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under
the terms of the Apache 2.0 license. For more information on following Developer
Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check
CONTRIBUTING.md
.PR Checklist
tools/devtool checkstyle
to verify that the PR passes theautomated style checks.
how they are solving the problem in a clear and encompassing way.
in the PR.
CHANGELOG.md
.Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
integration tests.
TODO
.rust-vmm
.