Skip to content
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

[NoQA] e2e: new common metrics (FPS, CPU, RAM) #43482

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jun 27, 2024

Conversation

kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor

@kirillzyusko kirillzyusko commented Jun 11, 2024

Details

Capture CPU, FPS and RAM for all tests.

Dev run (debug build, emulator, 8x runs):

image

Release run (release build, real device, 60x runs):

image

I also had to patch the new library - I opened the issue with all details bamlab/flashlight#291 (basically it was reproducible only on emulator, but I decided to keep the patch anyway because it improves the stability and maybe someone as me sometimes is running e2e tests on emulator too).

For second patch I created a PR to upstream: bamlab/flashlight#294

Fixed Issues

$ #19596
PROPOSAL: #19596 (comment)

Tests

  • Run e2e pipeline and be sure it's green and contains new metrics.

Offline tests

N/A

QA Steps

N/A

PR Author Checklist

  • I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
    • I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
    • I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
    • I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
    • I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
    • I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
  • I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
      • If any non-english text was added/modified, I verified the translation was requested/reviewed in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native image
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@hannojg
Copy link
Contributor

hannojg commented Jun 17, 2024

One quick note: I see that all units are in ms. I think we should fix that, so the units can be different.

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think we should fix that, so the units can be different.

Yeah, I also noticed that, but decided that it will bring a lot of changes in a single PR, so probably it would be good to handle as a separate task 👀

I think main units will be:

  • ms
  • count (re-render)
  • % (CPU usage)
  • mb (RAM)
  • FPS (UI/JS) thread.

@hannojg
Copy link
Contributor

hannojg commented Jun 17, 2024

How often did you ran the tests from the screenshot? We should run a full test run (I think these are 30x?) on a real device. We need to check if the values we get are stable.

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hannojg it was captured on debug build with dev config (x8 runs) on emulator. Below I attached a screenshot from a real device (my Pixel 7 Pro), 60x runs, release variant:

image

Metrics are very stable as you can see 👀 I'll update a description with a new screenshot 👍

@kirillzyusko kirillzyusko changed the title [WIP] e2e: new common metrics (FPS, CPU, RAM) [NoQA] e2e: new common metrics (FPS, CPU, RAM) Jun 17, 2024
@kirillzyusko kirillzyusko marked this pull request as ready for review June 17, 2024 08:54
@kirillzyusko kirillzyusko requested a review from a team as a code owner June 17, 2024 08:54
@melvin-bot melvin-bot bot requested review from alitoshmatov and removed request for a team June 17, 2024 08:54
Copy link

melvin-bot bot commented Jun 17, 2024

@alitoshmatov Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hannojg @mountiny @alitoshmatov this one is ready for review 🙌

Feel free to have a look 👀

Copy link
Contributor

@hannojg hannojg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

overall looks good, just a few things to think about twice 😊

Comment on lines +37 to +51
const ram = processRamOutput(ramStr, this.getRAMPageSize());
- const { frameTimes, interval: atraceInterval } = frameTimeParser.getFrameTimes(atrace, pid);
+
+ let output;
+ try {
+ output = frameTimeParser.getFrameTimes(atrace, pid);
+ } catch (e) {
+ console.error(e);
+ }
+
+ if (!output) {
+ return;
+ }
+
+ const { frameTimes, interval: atraceInterval } = output;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do we need this patch, or was that just for your debugging?

If we need it, we need an upstream issue + PR please

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@hannojg I already created it bamlab/flashlight#291 but haven't received any comments yet 🤔

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ah awesome - I think we should add this to the PR description !

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@hannojg done 😊

Comment on lines 7 to 12
MAIN_APP_PACKAGE: packageName,
DELTA_APP_PACKAGE: packageName,
BRANCH_MAIN: 'main',
BRANCH_DELTA: 'main',
MAIN_APP_PATH: appPath,
DELTA_APP_PATH: appPath,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is on purpose?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@hannojg yes. When we submit test result, then we specify branch and then we use the name of the branch to store the result.

Flashlight is running on the server, so we have to distinguish different builds (that's why I added BRANCH_MAIN/BRANCH_DELTA).

For dev config we run the same debug build (always main). That's why we specify main in both cases 🙂

tests/e2e/testRunner.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/e2e/testRunner.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/e2e/utils/measure.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
export * from "./utils/sanitizeProcessName";
export * from "./utils/round";
export * from "./reporting/cpu";
+export * from "./reporting/ram";
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

For that I created PR to upstream: bamlab/flashlight#294

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor Author

Also added separate metrics for JS and UI thread. So now we track next metrics:

  • RAM usage
  • FPS average
  • CPU average
  • CPU usage for JS thread
  • CPU usage for UI thread

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor Author

@alitoshmatov @mountiny this PR is ready for review 👀

mountiny
mountiny previously approved these changes Jun 20, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@mountiny mountiny left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I do not think we need C+ review here. @hayata-suenaga do you want to review and add the checklist?


let measures: Measure[] = [];
let polling = {
stop: (): void => {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

When will this version of the method callled?

I can see that the pulling is assigned a value inside start, but will the stop method change to this original definition when the profiler is stopped?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You're right, I added missing code in 7b1994b 🙌

@hayata-suenaga
Copy link
Contributor

hayata-suenaga commented Jun 24, 2024

Reviewer Checklist

  • I have verified the author checklist is complete (all boxes are checked off).
  • I verified the correct issue is linked in the ### Fixed Issues section above
  • I verified testing steps are clear and they cover the changes made in this PR
    • I verified the steps for local testing are in the Tests section
    • I verified the steps for Staging and/or Production testing are in the QA steps section
    • I verified the steps cover any possible failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
    • I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
  • I checked that screenshots or videos are included for tests on all platforms
  • I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
  • I verified tests pass on all platforms & I tested again on:
    • Android: Native
    • Android: mWeb Chrome
    • iOS: Native
    • iOS: mWeb Safari
    • MacOS: Chrome / Safari
    • MacOS: Desktop
  • If there are any errors in the console that are unrelated to this PR, I either fixed them (preferred) or linked to where I reported them in Slack
  • I verified proper code patterns were followed (see Reviewing the code)
    • I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick).
    • I verified that the left part of a conditional rendering a React component is a boolean and NOT a string, e.g. myBool && <MyComponent />.
    • I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
    • I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
    • I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
    • I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
    • I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is approved by marketing by adding the Waiting for Copy label for a copy review on the original GH to get the correct copy.
    • I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
    • I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
  • If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
  • I verified that this PR follows the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
  • I verified other components that can be impacted by these changes have been tested, and I retested again (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar have been tested & I retested again)
  • I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
  • I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.js or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
  • If a new component is created I verified that:
    • A similar component doesn't exist in the codebase
    • All props are defined accurately and each prop has a /** comment above it */
    • The file is named correctly
    • The component has a clear name that is non-ambiguous and the purpose of the component can be inferred from the name alone
    • The only data being stored in the state is data necessary for rendering and nothing else
    • For Class Components, any internal methods passed to components event handlers are bound to this properly so there are no scoping issues (i.e. for onClick={this.submit} the method this.submit should be bound to this in the constructor)
    • Any internal methods bound to this are necessary to be bound (i.e. avoid this.submit = this.submit.bind(this); if this.submit is never passed to a component event handler like onClick)
    • All JSX used for rendering exists in the render method
    • The component has the minimum amount of code necessary for its purpose, and it is broken down into smaller components in order to separate concerns and functions
  • If any new file was added I verified that:
    • The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
  • If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
    • A similar style doesn't already exist
    • The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG)
  • If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
  • If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
  • If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
  • If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
  • If the PR modifies the form input styles:
    • I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
    • I added Design label so the design team can review the changes.
  • If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
  • If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.
  • I have checked off every checkbox in the PR reviewer checklist, including those that don't apply to this PR.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native
Android: mWeb Chrome
iOS: Native
iOS: mWeb Safari
MacOS: Chrome / Safari
MacOS: Desktop

@hayata-suenaga
Copy link
Contributor

Just one question, but other than that, the code looks good to me!

@mountiny
Copy link
Contributor

I think this is ready for another look @hayata-suenaga

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hayata-suenaga just a friendly reminder 😊

@hayata-suenaga
Copy link
Contributor

sorry I have been on and off with travel sickness. I'm reviewing this now 🙇

@kirillzyusko
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hayata-suenaga okay, sure 🙌 🙂

Copy link
Contributor

@hayata-suenaga hayata-suenaga left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the change looks good to me 🟢 sorry for the late review 🙇

@hayata-suenaga hayata-suenaga merged commit d4e82ac into Expensify:main Jun 27, 2024
18 checks passed
@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release.

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

OSBotify commented Jul 3, 2024

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/jasperhuangg in version: 9.0.3-7 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

@OSBotify
Copy link
Contributor

🚀 Deployed to production by https://github.com/Julesssss in version: 9.0.5-13 🚀

platform result
🤖 android 🤖 success ✅
🖥 desktop 🖥 success ✅
🍎 iOS 🍎 success ✅
🕸 web 🕸 success ✅

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants