feat: add TimeDaemon CIT with pip hub infrastructure by gordon9901 · Pull Request #122 · eclipse-score/time

gordon9901 · 2026-07-09T08:51:40Z

This PR adds TimeDaemon component integration tests with pip hub infrastructure (part 1 of 3):

Add three independent pip hubs for TimeDaemon, TimeSlave, and MIT test suites
Add score_test_scenarios framework dependency with compatibility patch for score_baselibs 0.2.7
Add TimeDaemon CIT covering daemon lifecycle, control flow, IPC, SVT, and verification pipeline
Fix visibility for shm_ptp_engine and svt_handler to allow access from test scenarios

Part of #56

test QNX

github-actions · 2026-07-09T08:52:50Z

License Check Results

🚀 The license check job ran with the Bazel command:

bazel run //:license-check

Status: ⚠️ Needs Review

Click to expand output

[License Check Output]
Extracting Bazel installation...
Starting local Bazel server (8.6.0) and connecting to it...
INFO: Invocation ID: 2f5b7cd7-0e10-47f6-bbdd-e7a574e21f87
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
WARNING: For repository 'platforms', the root module requires module version platforms@1.0.0, but got platforms@1.1.0 in the resolved dependency graph. Please update the version in your MODULE.bazel or set --check_direct_dependencies=off
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Computing main repo mapping: 
Loading: 
Loading: 3 packages loaded
Analyzing: target //:license-check (4 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)
Analyzing: target //:license-check (4 packages loaded, 0 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (69 packages loaded, 10 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (110 packages loaded, 378 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (158 packages loaded, 3169 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (160 packages loaded, 6249 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (161 packages loaded, 8516 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (172 packages loaded, 9417 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (172 packages loaded, 9417 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (172 packages loaded, 9417 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (172 packages loaded, 9417 targets configured)

Analyzing: target //:license-check (176 packages loaded, 11429 targets configured)

INFO: Analyzed target //:license-check (177 packages loaded, 11555 targets configured).
[11 / 16] Creating runfiles tree bazel-out/k8-opt-exec-ST-d57f47055a04/bin/external/score_tooling+/dash/tool/formatters/dash_format_converter.runfiles [for tool]; 0s local
[12 / 16] JavaToolchainCompileClasses external/rules_java+/toolchains/platformclasspath_classes; 0s disk-cache, processwrapper-sandbox ... (2 actions running)
INFO: From Generating Dash formatted dependency file ...:
INFO: Successfully converted 2 packages from Cargo.lock to bazel-out/k8-fastbuild/bin/formatted.txt
[14 / 16] JavaToolchainCompileBootClasspath external/rules_java+/toolchains/platformclasspath.jar; 0s disk-cache, processwrapper-sandbox
INFO: Found 1 target...
Target //:license.check.license_check up-to-date:
  bazel-bin/license.check.license_check
  bazel-bin/license.check.license_check.jar
INFO: Elapsed time: 30.296s, Critical Path: 2.64s
INFO: 16 processes: 12 internal, 3 processwrapper-sandbox, 1 worker.
INFO: Build completed successfully, 16 total actions
INFO: Running command line: bazel-bin/license.check.license_check ./formatted.txt <args omitted>
usage: org.eclipse.dash.licenses.cli.Main [-batch <int>] [-cd <url>]
       [-confidence <int>] [-ef <url>] [-excludeSources <sources>] [-help] [-lic
       <url>] [-project <shortname>] [-repo <url>] [-review] [-summary <file>]
       [-timeout <seconds>] [-token <token>]

github-actions · 2026-07-10T04:58:12Z

The created documentation from the pull request is available at: docu-html

BjoernAtBosch · 2026-08-28T07:26:58Z

Sorry, I don't understand this: What is the benefit of using the combination of the pytest/testing_utils plus C++ code over using plain gtest/gmock? At the moment it looks to me making things more complicated and harder to understand.

Imho, for all the component internal testing, I would use gtest. That doesn't mean that everything tested with gtest is automatically a unit test (in the strict sense), it can be also some sort of integration tests - i.e. test which integrate multiple classes and test them together.

Then on the level of testing the whole component as a binary - TimeDaemon in this case - I'd use some pytests framework or ITF to stimulate and test the binary from "outside". And next step would be testing of multiple binaries "playing together".

Thanks, fair point. You're right that ptp_divider and the single-validator scenarios were duplicating gtest coverage with unnecessary indirection — I've removed them in the latest push.

The CIT layer now only keeps scenarios that wire together two or more production objects: verification.pipeline (PTP stub → verification machine), ipc.shm_roundtrip (publisher/receiver over shared memory), and daemon.lifecycle (full SvtHandler init/shutdown). Single-class behaviour stays with gtest under src/. Added a short README documenting the boundary.

The pytest + test_scenarios stack is the same SCORE-standard framework used for the upcoming module-integration and system-test layers (multi-binary, QEMU), so keeping it here gives one runner surface scaling up to those levels. Let me know if that still feels off.

BjoernAtBosch · 2026-08-31T14:29:54Z

+psutil
+pytest-metadata
+pytest-env
+testing-utils @ git+https://github.com/eclipse-score/testing_tools.git@a2f9cded3deb636f5dc800bf7a47131487119721


Please add version tag as comment

Suggested change

testing-utils @ git+https://github.com/eclipse-score/testing_tools.git@a2f9cded3deb636f5dc800bf7a47131487119721

testing-utils @ git+https://github.com/eclipse-score/testing_tools.git@a2f9cded3deb636f5dc800bf7a47131487119721 # v0.3.0

BjoernAtBosch · 2026-08-31T14:31:26Z

+    # via testing-utils
+# WARNING: pip install will require the following package to be hashed.
+# Consider using a hashable URL like https://github.com/jazzband/pip-tools/archive/SOMECOMMIT.zip
+testing-utils @ git+https://github.com/eclipse-score/testing_tools.git@v0.3.0


Oops - why is the hash here replaced by the version tag? Thought this is generated ...

BjoernAtBosch · 2026-08-31T16:08:56Z

+    void run(const std::string& /*input*/) const final
+    {
+        // Phase 1: construct — calls all four subsystem factory functions
+        auto handler = score::td::CreateSvtTimebase();
+
+        // Phase 2: initialize — wires MessageBroker pub-sub topology
+        handler->Initialize();
+
+        // Phase 3: stop from kIdle — verifies graceful shutdown without starting async workers
+        handler->Stop();
+
+        TRACING_INFO(kTargetName,
+                     std::pair{std::string{"lifecycle_initialize_ok"}, std::string{"true"}},
+                     std::pair{std::string{"lifecycle_complete"}, std::string{"true"}});
+    }


This is already tested in score/time_daemon/src/application/svt/svt_handler_integration_test.cpp

BjoernAtBosch · 2026-09-01T08:43:47Z

+    void run(const std::string& /*input*/) const final
+    {
+        auto publisher = score::td::CreateSvtPublisher("cit_ipc_pub");
+        auto receiver = score::td::CreateSvtReceiver();
+
+        if (!publisher->Init())
+        {
+            throw std::runtime_error{"SvtPublisher::Init() failed"};
+        }
+        if (!receiver->Init())
+        {
+            throw std::runtime_error{"SvtReceiver::Init() failed"};
+        }
+
+        score::td::PtpTimeInfo info{};
+        info.ptp_assumed_time = std::chrono::nanoseconds{1'000'000'000LL};
+        info.local_time = score::td::PtpTimeInfo::ReferenceClock::time_point{std::chrono::nanoseconds{500'000'000LL}};
+        info.rate_deviation = 0.0;
+        info.status = {true, false, false, false, true};
+        info.sync_fup_data.sequence_id = 42U;
+        info.sync_fup_data.precise_origin_timestamp = 1'000'000'000ULL;
+
+        publisher->OnMessage(info);
+
+        const auto result = receiver->Receive();
+        const bool read_ok = result.has_value();
+
+        bool ptp_time_ok = false;
+        bool status_ok = false;
+        bool seq_ok = false;
+
+        if (read_ok)
+        {
+            const auto& snap = result.value();
+            ptp_time_ok = snap.ptp_assumed_time == static_cast<uint64_t>(1'000'000'000LL);
+            status_ok = snap.status.is_synchronized && snap.status.is_correct;
+            seq_ok = snap.sync_fup_data.sequence_id == 42U;
+        }
+
+        TRACING_INFO(kTargetName,
+                     std::pair{std::string{"read_succeeded"}, std::string{read_ok ? "true" : "false"}},
+                     std::pair{std::string{"ptp_time_preserved"}, std::string{ptp_time_ok ? "true" : "false"}},
+                     std::pair{std::string{"status_preserved"}, std::string{status_ok ? "true" : "false"}},
+                     std::pair{std::string{"seq_id_preserved"}, std::string{seq_ok ? "true" : "false"}});
+    }


This is also already tested: score/time_daemon/src/ipc/svt/common_factory_test.cpp

BjoernAtBosch · 2026-09-01T09:13:12Z

+    {
+        auto ptp_machine = score::td::CreateGPTPStubMachine("cit_verif_ptp");
+        auto verifier = score::td::CreateSvtVerificationMachine("cit_verif");
+
+        std::promise<score::td::PtpTimeInfo> verified_promise;
+        auto verified_future = verified_promise.get_future();
+
+        // Wire PTP machine output into the verification pipeline.
+        ptp_machine->SetPublishCallback([&verifier](const score::td::PtpTimeInfo& data) {
+            verifier->OnMessage(data);
+        });
+
+        // Capture the first data point that exits the verification pipeline.
+        verifier->SetPublishCallback([&verified_promise](const score::td::PtpTimeInfo& data) {
+            try
+            {
+                verified_promise.set_value(data);
+            }
+            catch (const std::future_error&)
+            {
+                // Capture only the first verified data point.
+            }
+        });
+
+        verifier->Init();
+
+        if (!ptp_machine->Init())
+        {
+            throw std::runtime_error{"GPTPStubMachine::Init() failed"};
+        }
+        ptp_machine->Start();
+
+        if (verified_future.wait_for(std::chrono::seconds(5)) != std::future_status::ready)
+        {
+            ptp_machine->Stop();
+            throw std::runtime_error{"Timed out waiting for verified PTP data through pipeline"};
+        }


This kind of test makes sense, because it really combines multiple sub-components. Following remarks:

We should use plain gtest for doing this. Makes error checking much easier and expressive, e.g. instead of having:

if (!ptp_machine->Init()) { throw std::runtime_error{"GPTPStubMachine::Init() failed"}; }

we'd have:

ASSERT_TRUE(ptp_machine->Init());

and no additional checks on Python side.

A similar test like this could be achieved by instantiating the application svt_handler. Valery already added test code there (score/time_daemon/src/application/svt/svt_handler_integration_test.cpp) but that is commented out at the moment.

I really would use Python/ITF based tests only for testing a single - in this case the TimeDaemon - or multiple binaries working together.

github-project-automation Bot added this to TIM - Time FT Jul 9, 2026

github-project-automation Bot moved this to In Progress in TIM - Time FT Jul 9, 2026

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval July 9, 2026 08:51 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval July 9, 2026 08:52 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval July 10, 2026 04:41 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval July 10, 2026 04:52 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval July 10, 2026 05:56 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 requested review from BjoernAtBosch and lavrovvalera July 10, 2026 06:04

ryan-steel reviewed Jul 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread score/time_daemon/src/ptp_machine/shm/details/BUILD Outdated

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval July 22, 2026 10:27 — with GitHub Actions Error

lavrovvalera suggested changes Jul 29, 2026

View reviewed changes

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval July 30, 2026 10:10 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval July 30, 2026 10:18 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 requested review from lavrovvalera and ryan-steel July 30, 2026 10:25

anmittag assigned gordon9901 Jul 31, 2026

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 7, 2026 04:55 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 11, 2026 05:39 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 force-pushed the ecarx_time_daemon_cit branch from db540ed to d765fee Compare August 13, 2026 09:48

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 13, 2026 09:48 — with GitHub Actions Error

BjoernAtBosch mentioned this pull request Aug 13, 2026

Add user manuals for time module #148

Merged

lavrovvalera approved these changes Aug 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into ecarx_time_daemon_cit

4bf3136

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 19, 2026 02:22 — with GitHub Actions Error

Merge branch 'main' into ecarx_time_daemon_cit

d72e98b

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 20, 2026 07:43 — with GitHub Actions Error

BjoernAtBosch reviewed Aug 28, 2026

View reviewed changes

merge: resolve MODULE.bazel.lock conflict with main

2dbb8bd

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 28, 2026 09:27 — with GitHub Actions Error

Merge branch 'main' into ecarx_time_daemon_cit

bc6a669

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 28, 2026 09:59 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 31, 2026 07:39 — with GitHub Actions Error

gordon9901 added 2 commits August 31, 2026 16:09

chore: add local clang-tidy config to silence noise

05aafa5

test(time_daemon/cit): narrow to multi-module integration

321294a

gordon9901 force-pushed the ecarx_time_daemon_cit branch from f74e6e9 to 321294a Compare August 31, 2026 08:29

gordon9901 had a problem deploying to workflow-approval August 31, 2026 08:29 — with GitHub Actions Error

Merge branch 'main' into ecarx_time_daemon_cit

b0aa357

gordon9901 requested a deployment to workflow-approval August 31, 2026 08:31 — with GitHub Actions Waiting

gordon9901 requested a review from BjoernAtBosch August 31, 2026 09:15

BjoernAtBosch reviewed Sep 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

	testing-utils @ git+https://github.com/eclipse-score/testing_tools.git@a2f9cded3deb636f5dc800bf7a47131487119721
	testing-utils @ git+https://github.com/eclipse-score/testing_tools.git@a2f9cded3deb636f5dc800bf7a47131487119721 # v0.3.0

Uh oh!

Conversation

gordon9901 commented Jul 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

License Check Results

Uh oh!

github-actions Bot commented Jul 10, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

BjoernAtBosch Aug 28, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gordon9901 Aug 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BjoernAtBosch Aug 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BjoernAtBosch Aug 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BjoernAtBosch Aug 31, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BjoernAtBosch Sep 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

BjoernAtBosch Sep 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

gordon9901 commented Jul 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

github-actions Bot commented Jul 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading

BjoernAtBosch Aug 28, 2026 •

edited

Loading