From 82ba73535c0966e8ae8fb50db1ea23534d827717 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Paul Elder Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2020 20:47:19 +0900 Subject: utils: ipc: import mojo MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Import mojo from the Chromium repository, so that we can use it for generating code for the IPC mechanism. The commit from which this was taken is: a079161ec8c6907b883f9cb84fc8c4e7896cb1d0 "Add PPAPI constructs for sending focus object to PdfAccessibilityTree" This tree has been pruned to remove directories that didn't have any necessary code: - mojo/* except for mojo/public - mojo core, docs, and misc files - mojo/public/* except for mojo/public/{tools,LICENSE} - language bindings for IPC, tests, and some mojo internals - mojo/public/tools/{fuzzers,chrome_ipc} - mojo/public/tools/bindings/generators - code generation for other languages No files were modified. Signed-off-by: Paul Elder Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart Acked-by: Niklas Söderlund Acked-by: Kieran Bingham --- .../tools/mojom/version_compatibility_unittest.py | 397 +++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 397 insertions(+) create mode 100644 utils/ipc/mojo/public/tools/mojom/version_compatibility_unittest.py (limited to 'utils/ipc/mojo/public/tools/mojom/version_compatibility_unittest.py') diff --git a/utils/ipc/mojo/public/tools/mojom/version_compatibility_unittest.py b/utils/ipc/mojo/public/tools/mojom/version_compatibility_unittest.py new file mode 100644 index 00000000..a0ee150e --- /dev/null +++ b/utils/ipc/mojo/public/tools/mojom/version_compatibility_unittest.py @@ -0,0 +1,397 @@ +# Copyright 2020 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved. +# Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be +# found in the LICENSE file. + +from mojom_parser_test_case import MojomParserTestCase + + +class VersionCompatibilityTest(MojomParserTestCase): + """Tests covering compatibility between two versions of the same mojom type + definition. This coverage ensures that we can reliably detect unsafe changes + to definitions that are expected to tolerate version skew in production + environments.""" + + def _GetTypeCompatibilityMap(self, old_mojom, new_mojom): + """Helper to support the implementation of assertBackwardCompatible and + assertNotBackwardCompatible.""" + + old = self.ExtractTypes(old_mojom) + new = self.ExtractTypes(new_mojom) + self.assertEqual(set(old.keys()), set(new.keys()), + 'Old and new test mojoms should use the same type names.') + + compatibility_map = {} + for name in old.keys(): + compatibility_map[name] = new[name].IsBackwardCompatible(old[name]) + return compatibility_map + + def assertBackwardCompatible(self, old_mojom, new_mojom): + compatibility_map = self._GetTypeCompatibilityMap(old_mojom, new_mojom) + for name, compatible in compatibility_map.items(): + if not compatible: + raise AssertionError( + 'Given the old mojom:\n\n %s\n\nand the new mojom:\n\n %s\n\n' + 'The new definition of %s should pass a backward-compatibiity ' + 'check, but it does not.' % (old_mojom, new_mojom, name)) + + def assertNotBackwardCompatible(self, old_mojom, new_mojom): + compatibility_map = self._GetTypeCompatibilityMap(old_mojom, new_mojom) + if all(compatibility_map.values()): + raise AssertionError( + 'Given the old mojom:\n\n %s\n\nand the new mojom:\n\n %s\n\n' + 'The new mojom should fail a backward-compatibility check, but it ' + 'does not.' % (old_mojom, new_mojom)) + + def testNewNonExtensibleEnumValue(self): + """Adding a value to a non-extensible enum breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('enum E { kFoo, kBar };', + 'enum E { kFoo, kBar, kBaz };') + + def testNewNonExtensibleEnumValueWithMinVersion(self): + """Adding a value to a non-extensible enum breaks backward-compatibility, + even with a new [MinVersion] specified for the value.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + 'enum E { kFoo, kBar };', 'enum E { kFoo, kBar, [MinVersion=1] kBaz };') + + def testNewValueInExistingVersion(self): + """Adding a value to an existing version is not allowed, even if the old + enum was marked [Extensible]. Note that it is irrelevant whether or not the + new enum is marked [Extensible].""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('[Extensible] enum E { kFoo, kBar };', + 'enum E { kFoo, kBar, kBaz };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kFoo, kBar };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kFoo, kBar, kBaz };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kFoo, [MinVersion=1] kBar };', + 'enum E { kFoo, [MinVersion=1] kBar, [MinVersion=1] kBaz };') + + def testEnumValueRemoval(self): + """Removal of an enum value is never valid even for [Extensible] enums.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('enum E { kFoo, kBar };', + 'enum E { kFoo };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('[Extensible] enum E { kFoo, kBar };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kFoo };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, [MinVersion=1] kB };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, [MinVersion=1] kB, [MinVersion=1] kZ };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, [MinVersion=1] kB };') + + def testNewExtensibleEnumValueWithMinVersion(self): + """Adding a new and properly [MinVersion]'d value to an [Extensible] enum + is a backward-compatible change. Note that it is irrelevant whether or not + the new enum is marked [Extensible].""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible('[Extensible] enum E { kA, kB };', + 'enum E { kA, kB, [MinVersion=1] kC };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, kB };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, kB, [MinVersion=1] kC };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, [MinVersion=1] kB };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, [MinVersion=1] kB, [MinVersion=2] kC };') + + def testRenameEnumValue(self): + """Renaming an enum value does not affect backward-compatibility. Only + numeric value is relevant.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible('enum E { kA, kB };', 'enum E { kX, kY };') + + def testAddEnumValueAlias(self): + """Adding new enum fields does not affect backward-compatibility if it does + not introduce any new numeric values.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'enum E { kA, kB };', 'enum E { kA, kB, kC = kA, kD = 1, kE = kD };') + + def testEnumIdentity(self): + """An unchanged enum is obviously backward-compatible.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible('enum E { kA, kB, kC };', + 'enum E { kA, kB, kC };') + + def testNewStructFieldUnversioned(self): + """Adding a new field to a struct without a new (i.e. higher than any + existing version) [MinVersion] tag breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('struct S { string a; };', + 'struct S { string a; string b; };') + + def testStructFieldRemoval(self): + """Removing a field from a struct breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('struct S { string a; string b; };', + 'struct S { string a; };') + + def testStructFieldTypeChange(self): + """Changing the type of an existing field always breaks + backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('struct S { string a; };', + 'struct S { array a; };') + + def testStructFieldBecomingOptional(self): + """Changing a field from non-optional to optional breaks + backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('struct S { string a; };', + 'struct S { string? a; };') + + def testStructFieldBecomingNonOptional(self): + """Changing a field from optional to non-optional breaks + backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('struct S { string? a; };', + 'struct S { string a; };') + + def testStructFieldOrderChange(self): + """Changing the order of fields breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('struct S { string a; bool b; };', + 'struct S { bool b; string a; };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('struct S { string a@0; bool b@1; };', + 'struct S { string a@1; bool b@0; };') + + def testStructFieldMinVersionChange(self): + """Changing the MinVersion of a field breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S { string a; [MinVersion=1] string? b; };', + 'struct S { string a; [MinVersion=2] string? b; };') + + def testStructFieldTypeChange(self): + """If a struct field's own type definition changes, the containing struct + is backward-compatible if and only if the field type's change is + backward-compatible.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S {}; struct T { S s; };', + 'struct S { [MinVersion=1] int32 x; }; struct T { S s; };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kA }; struct S { E e; };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, [MinVersion=1] kB }; struct S { E e; };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S {}; struct T { S s; };', + 'struct S { int32 x; }; struct T { S s; };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kA }; struct S { E e; };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, kB }; struct S { E e; };') + + def testNewStructFieldWithInvalidMinVersion(self): + """Adding a new field using an existing MinVersion breaks backward- + compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + """\ + struct S { + string a; + [MinVersion=1] string? b; + }; + """, """\ + struct S { + string a; + [MinVersion=1] string? b; + [MinVersion=1] string? c; + };""") + + def testNewStructFieldWithValidMinVersion(self): + """Adding a new field is safe if tagged with a MinVersion greater than any + previously used MinVersion in the struct.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S { int32 a; };', + 'struct S { int32 a; [MinVersion=1] int32 b; };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S { int32 a; [MinVersion=1] int32 b; };', + 'struct S { int32 a; [MinVersion=1] int32 b; [MinVersion=2] bool c; };') + + def testNewStructFieldNullableReference(self): + """Adding a new nullable reference-typed field is fine if versioned + properly.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S { int32 a; };', + 'struct S { int32 a; [MinVersion=1] string? b; };') + + def testStructFieldRename(self): + """Renaming a field has no effect on backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible('struct S { int32 x; bool b; };', + 'struct S { int32 a; bool b; };') + + def testStructFieldReorderWithExplicitOrdinals(self): + """Reordering fields has no effect on backward-compatibility when field + ordinals are explicitly labeled and remain unchanged.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible('struct S { bool b@1; int32 a@0; };', + 'struct S { int32 a@0; bool b@1; };') + + def testNewUnionFieldUnversioned(self): + """Adding a new field to a union without a new (i.e. higher than any + existing version) [MinVersion] tag breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('union U { string a; };', + 'union U { string a; string b; };') + + def testUnionFieldRemoval(self): + """Removing a field from a union breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('union U { string a; string b; };', + 'union U { string a; };') + + def testUnionFieldTypeChange(self): + """Changing the type of an existing field always breaks + backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('union U { string a; };', + 'union U { array a; };') + + def testUnionFieldBecomingOptional(self): + """Changing a field from non-optional to optional breaks + backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('union U { string a; };', + 'union U { string? a; };') + + def testUnionFieldBecomingNonOptional(self): + """Changing a field from optional to non-optional breaks + backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('union U { string? a; };', + 'union U { string a; };') + + def testUnionFieldOrderChange(self): + """Changing the order of fields breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('union U { string a; bool b; };', + 'union U { bool b; string a; };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('union U { string a@0; bool b@1; };', + 'union U { string a@1; bool b@0; };') + + def testUnionFieldMinVersionChange(self): + """Changing the MinVersion of a field breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + 'union U { string a; [MinVersion=1] string b; };', + 'union U { string a; [MinVersion=2] string b; };') + + def testUnionFieldTypeChange(self): + """If a union field's own type definition changes, the containing union + is backward-compatible if and only if the field type's change is + backward-compatible.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S {}; union U { S s; };', + 'struct S { [MinVersion=1] int32 x; }; union U { S s; };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kA }; union U { E e; };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, [MinVersion=1] kB }; union U { E e; };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S {}; union U { S s; };', + 'struct S { int32 x; }; union U { S s; };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + '[Extensible] enum E { kA }; union U { E e; };', + '[Extensible] enum E { kA, kB }; union U { E e; };') + + def testNewUnionFieldWithInvalidMinVersion(self): + """Adding a new field using an existing MinVersion breaks backward- + compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + """\ + union U { + string a; + [MinVersion=1] string b; + }; + """, """\ + union U { + string a; + [MinVersion=1] string b; + [MinVersion=1] string c; + };""") + + def testNewUnionFieldWithValidMinVersion(self): + """Adding a new field is safe if tagged with a MinVersion greater than any + previously used MinVersion in the union.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'union U { int32 a; };', + 'union U { int32 a; [MinVersion=1] int32 b; };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'union U { int32 a; [MinVersion=1] int32 b; };', + 'union U { int32 a; [MinVersion=1] int32 b; [MinVersion=2] bool c; };') + + def testUnionFieldRename(self): + """Renaming a field has no effect on backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible('union U { int32 x; bool b; };', + 'union U { int32 a; bool b; };') + + def testUnionFieldReorderWithExplicitOrdinals(self): + """Reordering fields has no effect on backward-compatibility when field + ordinals are explicitly labeled and remain unchanged.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible('union U { bool b@1; int32 a@0; };', + 'union U { int32 a@0; bool b@1; };') + + def testNewInterfaceMethodUnversioned(self): + """Adding a new method to an interface without a new (i.e. higher than any + existing version) [MinVersion] tag breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A(); };', + 'interface F { A(); B(); };') + + def testInterfaceMethodRemoval(self): + """Removing a method from an interface breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A(); B(); };', + 'interface F { A(); };') + + def testInterfaceMethodParamsChanged(self): + """Changes to the parameter list are only backward-compatible if they meet + backward-compatibility requirements of an equivalent struct definition.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A(); };', + 'interface F { A(int32 x); };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A(int32 x); };', + 'interface F { A(bool x); };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + 'interface F { A(int32 x, [MinVersion=1] string? s); };', """\ + interface F { + A(int32 x, [MinVersion=1] string? s, [MinVersion=1] int32 y); + };""") + + self.assertBackwardCompatible('interface F { A(int32 x); };', + 'interface F { A(int32 a); };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'interface F { A(int32 x); };', + 'interface F { A(int32 x, [MinVersion=1] string? s); };') + + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S {}; interface F { A(S s); };', + 'struct S { [MinVersion=1] int32 x; }; interface F { A(S s); };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S {}; struct T {}; interface F { A(S s); };', + 'struct S {}; struct T {}; interface F { A(T s); };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + 'struct S {}; struct T { int32 x; }; interface F { A(S s); };', + 'struct S {}; struct T { int32 x; }; interface F { A(T t); };') + + def testInterfaceMethodReplyAdded(self): + """Adding a reply to a message breaks backward-compatibilty.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A(); };', + 'interface F { A() => (); };') + + def testInterfaceMethodReplyRemoved(self): + """Removing a reply from a message breaks backward-compatibility.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A() => (); };', + 'interface F { A(); };') + + def testInterfaceMethodReplyParamsChanged(self): + """Similar to request parameters, a change to reply parameters is considered + backward-compatible if it meets the same backward-compatibility + requirements imposed on equivalent struct changes.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A() => (); };', + 'interface F { A() => (int32 x); };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A() => (int32 x); };', + 'interface F { A() => (); };') + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible('interface F { A() => (bool x); };', + 'interface F { A() => (int32 x); };') + + self.assertBackwardCompatible('interface F { A() => (int32 a); };', + 'interface F { A() => (int32 x); };') + self.assertBackwardCompatible( + 'interface F { A() => (int32 x); };', + 'interface F { A() => (int32 x, [MinVersion] string? s); };') + + def testNewInterfaceMethodWithInvalidMinVersion(self): + """Adding a new method to an existing version is not backward-compatible.""" + self.assertNotBackwardCompatible( + """\ + interface F { + A(); + [MinVersion=1] B(); + }; + """, """\ + interface F { + A(); + [MinVersion=1] B(); + [MinVersion=1] C(); + }; + """) + + def testNewInterfaceMethodWithValidMinVersion(self): + """Adding a new method is fine as long as its MinVersion exceeds that of any + method on the old interface definition.""" + self.assertBackwardCompatible('interface F { A(); };', + 'interface F { A(); [MinVersion=1] B(); };') -- cgit v1.2.1