<div dir="auto"><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Sat, Apr 28, 2018, 6:31 PM Chris Johns <<a href="mailto:chrisj@rtems.org" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">chrisj@rtems.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">On 29/4/18 8:27 am, Cillian O'Donnell wrote:<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> On Sat, 28 Apr 2018, 20:39 Vijay Kumar Banerjee, <<a href="mailto:vijaykumar9597@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">vijaykumar9597@gmail.com</a><br>
> <mailto:<a href="mailto:vijaykumar9597@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">vijaykumar9597@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> This is the log file that I'm getting after running the test<br>
> <br>
> I'm getting a lot of 'invalid' results , am I missing something ?<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> What we had in coverage.py and test.py will need to be updated with Chris'<br>
> change to covoar. It's probably best not to run it with rtems-test until we've<br>
> revised that. <br>
<br>
Yes this is the plan.<br>
<br>
> We'll just be testing covoar by itself for the moment. The focus<br>
> will probably be on removing covoars dependency on external tools next.<br>
<br>
Removing all the external exec is a complex problem to solve, for example to<br>
remove addr2lin we need to add libdwarf to the rtemstoolkit and that is not in<br>
the planned work for this GSoC.<br></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Yes. But if we view this as a requirement to start the GSoC project, we can adjust the project.</div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Programmatically this may be simple assuming an addr2line query is easy with libdwarf. We could then replace that exec with a new helper class call. But adding libfwarf to rtems-tools may be harder.</div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">I was looking for a libdwarf example program that did something with file and line information. But from my phone, it is hard to look at that kind of code.</div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Once these patches have been pushed to master I will look for solutions to get<br>
what we have working on all platforms, for example removing the dos2unix command.<br>
<br>
> Chris will we pass in the score ini to -S option now and then the other options<br>
> are picked up from there? (Excluding -p and -E).<br>
<br>
I am not sure yet. Once you are happy with the changes I have made I was going<br>
to take the rtems-tester patches and update them.<br>
<br>
For example I have side stepped the issue of detected a coverage version of qemu<br>
or having a coverage enable flag by creating leon3-qemu-cov as a BSP and if that<br>
is used with RTEMS tester it expects a coverage qemu to be available.<br></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">This is not a bad solution.</div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
> after this patch along with with the c++ cleanup patch, we have to start<br>
> working on parsing the coverage right?<br>
<br>
I am not sure, Joel? :)<br></blockquote></div></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Chris has identified removing the use of exec() as a goal. Plus some other clean up. I assume the clean up list from him without exec is something I can nibble on and has no impact on the GSoC project.</div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Are there shell/exec calls left other than addr2line and objdump?</div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Addr2line usage looks easier to eliminate. Get an example program working that does the addr2line query and then turn that into a helper class.</div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Objdump is harder to replace.</div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">From a practical viewpoint, if Vijay is producing coverage reports and gcov files, the GSoC project could proceed without modification. But we should all agree but that's what we want to do. Addr2line removal may make sense first.</div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">For sure any cleanup or other issues in covoar that we are deferring for even the briefest time need a ticket.</div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px"><br></div><div dir="auto" style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:12.8px">Chris.. Good reasons to fix addr2line usage or just push forward. I am leaning to asking Vijay to address addr2line first but we have to decide about who handles libdwarf integration.</div></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Chris<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
devel mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:devel@rtems.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">devel@rtems.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel</a></blockquote></div></div></div>