Coverage tools project direction [GSOC]

[Joel Sherrill]

On Jun 4, 2017 7:03 AM, "Cillian O'Donnell" <cpodonnell8 at gmail.com> wrote:

> I would.focus first on running coverture-qemu instead regular qemu. This
includes the rsb support but is just focused on parity with no coverage.


Ok, so right now I should forget about the coverage. Run the tests
normally (qemu) and then with couverture-qemu for all the bsps
couverture supports. This confirms that couverture is working
correctly before the rsb switch. Then in terms of the rsb support, do
I just grep for qemu in the rsb and go through the files one by one
and change things.


Sounds good. Switch current tool box to include coverture-qemu




Thanks,

Cillian.

On 4 June 2017 at 11:58, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
> I would.focus first on running coverture-qemu instead regular qemu. This
> includes the rsb support but is just focused on parity with no coverage.
>
> Then run coverture-qemu with coverage on by hand and see if it gets the
> output either the old or new scripts expect. Do this with just one test.
>
> Then fix and update patches  as needed so RTEMS-tester can enable a
coverage
> run.
>
> While testing the old stuff, I had it in parts for testing purposes:
running
> with coverage and generating reports. I would run the report side over and
> over on the same output.
>
> So sorry about one step at a time. The old scripts were intended to be a
> reference for you. That was a working procedure.
>
> --joel
>
> On Jun 4, 2017 5:37 AM, "Cillian O'Donnell" <cpodonnell8 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chris,
>>
>> > Which BSPs that support qemu are missing from the rtems-test tool?
>>
>>
>> I suppose I had been thinking in terms of coverage and all I have is
>> coverage.mc files for PC386, Leon 2 and Leon 3 but now that I'm
>> thinking about it maybe all I need to do is to run the tests for qemu
>> and couverture-qemu and compare the results and if they're similar I
>> know couverture is working fine and I can move onto the RSB work. I'm
>> looking for a bit of clarification myself.
>>
>> > first the ability to run a specific qemu for a BSP
>>
>>
>> As I had understood it, we were swapping out qemu for couverture-qemu,
>> there was no need to have both, although I could be wrong.
>>
>>
>> > Where is the repo with the RTEMS Tester you are working on?
>>
>> All the changes are local at the moment, I have been holding off
>> making the commits as I haven't been able to get coverage to
>> successfully run yet. I'm hoping if I can get those bsps to run then
>> I'll try and begin to get everything merged and get cracking on the
>> rest of the bsps. The current state of things is I've managed to
>> insulate the coverage work so it's at least no longer breaking what's
>> already there and the coverage runs are all running into errors in
>> qemu.cfg, probably the bsp options in the coverage.mc files, not sure
>> what to use yet. All tests invalid, default to dry-run
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Cillian.
>>
>> On 4 June 2017 at 03:56, Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org> wrote:
>> > On 3/6/17 10:14 pm, Cillian O'Donnell wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I've just realised that I've been fixing problems with the RTEMS
>> >> Tester work that has already been done to convert bash scripts to
>> >> python, but I probably should of first been trying to get the old
>> >> sim-scripts method working from rtems-testing repo because this will
>> >> give me more bsps to test qemu with. So I'm now trying to fix the
>> >> do_coverage runtime errors due to covoar and its related files being
>> >> moved to RTEMS Tester.
>> >
>> > I would prefer we do not invest more time in the scripts in the
>> > rtems-testing
>> > repo. I personally would like to move this repo to under Joel so it
>> > becomes a
>> > personal repo for him and away from the top level because a new user
>> > could think
>> > this is the way to test.
>> >
>> > Which BSPs that support qemu are missing from the rtems-test tool?
>> >
>> >> I just want to confirm if I'm heading in the right direction. First
>> >> get the old sim-scripts method working. Test qemu against
>> >> couverture-qemu for bsps common to both. Then do the RSB support for
>> >> couverture-qemu. Then get the RTEMS Tester work running and convert
>> >> the rest of the sim-scripts. Is that right, or should I continue with
>> >> the RTEMS Tester work?
>> >
>> > I see 2 parts to the RTEMS Tester work, first the ability to run a
>> > specific qemu
>> > for a BSP and the integration of the coverage support. Is this correct?
>> >
>> > Where is the repo with the RTEMS Tester you are working on? I saw a
post
>> > the
>> > other day with some extra output and was wanting to ask.
>> >
>> > Chris
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> devel at rtems.org
>> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20170604/906bf6e0/attachment-0002.html>