Skip to content

Conversation

@DontPanicO
Copy link
Contributor

@DontPanicO DontPanicO commented Nov 2, 2025

Changes

Adds a new integration test that verifies Firecracker can be built and run with log_instrument tracing instrumentation enabled.

Reason

Fixes #4215

As discussed in #4215 (comment) the goal is to validate Firecracker when instrumented specifically with the log-instrument crate from the current workspace, rather than any generic tracing tool.

This implementation takes inspiration from #5256, adapting it to work with log-instrument.

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

  • I have read and understand CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • I have run tools/devtool checkbuild --all to verify that the PR passes
    build checks on all supported architectures.
  • I have run tools/devtool checkstyle to verify that the PR passes the
    automated style checks.
  • I have described what is done in these changes, why they are needed, and
    how they are solving the problem in a clear and encompassing way.
  • I have updated any relevant documentation (both in code and in the docs)
    in the PR.
  • I have mentioned all user-facing changes in CHANGELOG.md.
  • If a specific issue led to this PR, this PR closes the issue.
  • When making API changes, I have followed the
    Runbook for Firecracker API changes.
  • I have tested all new and changed functionalities in unit tests and/or
    integration tests.
  • I have linked an issue to every new TODO.

  • This functionality cannot be added in rust-vmm.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 4, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 82.83%. Comparing base (04a1caa) to head (6b626e0).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #5497   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   82.83%   82.83%           
=======================================
  Files         269      269           
  Lines       27723    27723           
=======================================
  Hits        22965    22965           
  Misses       4758     4758           
Flag Coverage Δ
5.10-m5n.metal 83.01% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6a.metal 82.27% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m6g.metal 79.66% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m6i.metal 83.00% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m7a.metal-48xl 82.27% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m7g.metal 79.66% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m7i.metal-24xl 82.98% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m7i.metal-48xl 82.97% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
5.10-m8g.metal-24xl 79.65% <ø> (ø)
5.10-m8g.metal-48xl 79.66% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m5n.metal 83.04% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
6.1-m6a.metal 82.31% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m6g.metal 79.65% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m6i.metal 83.03% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m7a.metal-48xl 82.29% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m7g.metal 79.65% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m7i.metal-24xl 83.04% <ø> (ø)
6.1-m7i.metal-48xl 83.05% <ø> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
6.1-m8g.metal-24xl 79.65% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
6.1-m8g.metal-48xl 79.65% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@DontPanicO DontPanicO force-pushed the test_instrumented_binary branch 2 times, most recently from 7aca9f2 to c075816 Compare November 4, 2025 22:47
@DontPanicO DontPanicO force-pushed the test_instrumented_binary branch from c075816 to 0f0e9e7 Compare November 6, 2025 12:52
Adds a new integration test that verifies Firecracker can be
built and run with `log_instrument` tracing instrumentation\
enabled.

Signed-off-by: DontPanicO <[email protected]>
@DontPanicO DontPanicO force-pushed the test_instrumented_binary branch from 0f0e9e7 to 4b40a80 Compare November 6, 2025 14:23
Copy link
Contributor

@kalyazin kalyazin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me!
Let me find someone else to have another look.

@kalyazin kalyazin self-assigned this Nov 7, 2025
@kalyazin kalyazin added the Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed label Nov 7, 2025
@JackThomson2 JackThomson2 merged commit 5e38aae into firecracker-microvm:main Nov 7, 2025
8 checks passed
@kalyazin
Copy link
Contributor

kalyazin commented Nov 7, 2025

@DontPanicO thanks again for your contribution!

@DontPanicO
Copy link
Contributor Author

DontPanicO commented Nov 7, 2025

@kalyazin Thanks for the guidance, looking forward to contributing more

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Status: Awaiting review Indicates that a pull request is ready to be reviewed

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Test instrumented binary

3 participants