<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 03/31/2017 09:52 PM, Gedare Bloom
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAC82fA3R+_mzE1BsXL2R3re+ay2PwBM6ftXsk4bsk=z+r7Oa1g@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Don't forget the deadline is Monday to submit your Final
PDF and proof of enrollment. The "Final" PDF can be submitted multiple
times, so go ahead and submit it when you finish a first draft. Add
your draft proposal to the tracking table at
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/GSoC/2017">https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/GSoC/2017</a> also, to get some possible
feedback.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Thanks for the welcome! (I realize I am late to the GSOC application
table).<br>
<br>
I'm set on improving code coverage of the testsuite, but I found
some questions as I'm starting to look into how its done.<br>
<br>
The link on the wiki to the current code status is currently <a
href="https://www.rtems.org/ftp/pub/rtems/people/joel/coverage/">broken</a>,
so I tried to generate a sample coverage report for 4.12 using
./do_coverage, ./run_coverage and ./coverage_cron as suggested on
the wiki <a
href="https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/TBR/UserManual/RTEMS_Coverage_Analysis#HowitisDoneNow">here
</a>but without any luck. Is there an up to date coverage report
available?<br>
I modified the VERSIONS-COVERAGE file like the wiki said, and once
that didn't work dug around in the script but fix it myself quickly.<br>
<br>
Could updating these coverage analysis scripts be a viable component
of a GSOC proposal?<br>
<br>
In addition, I'd like to actually make some improvements the code
coverage itself.<br>
The most recent information I could find was these bar graphs from <a
href="https://devel.rtems.org/wiki/Developer/Coverage/Status">2009.</a><br>
If these graphs reflect the current coverage state, I think that
improving coverage for the i386/pc386, <br>
would be interesting because there is room for improvement in both
the Baseline and Developmental groups (if these coverage statistics
are up to date).<br>
<br>
Does anyone know of a good reason to choose another BSP over
i386/pc386?<br>
<br>
I've just posted a draft of my proposal to the GSOC page. <br>
If there's any feedback I'll be sure to update my proposal in time.<br>
<br>
-Andy MacGregor<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>