Gcov support in Covoar

[Vijay Kumar Banerjee]

I have filed a ticket for gcov, as suggested by Joel.

https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3468

-- vijay

On 8 July 2018 at 01:43, Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org> wrote:

> On 8/7/18 7:51 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote:
> > On 8 July 2018 at 01:08, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org <mailto:
> joel at rtems.org>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >     On Sat, Jul 7, 2018, 2:33 PM Chris Johns <chris at contemporary.net.au
> >     <mailto:chris at contemporary.net.au>> wrote:
> >
> >         On 5 Jul 2018, at 3:07 am, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org
> >         <mailto:joel at rtems.org>
> >         <mailto:joel at rtems.org <mailto:joel at rtems.org>>> wrote:
> >         > On Wed, Jul 4, 2018, 3:06 AM Chris Johns <chrisj at rtems.org
> <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org>
> >         > <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org <mailto:chrisj at rtems.org>>> wrote:
> >         >
> >         >     How does this fit into the RTEMS Tester tool?
> >         >
> >         >
> >         > If you want to run gcov or lcov on uninstrumented executables,
> then covoar has
> >         > to read gcno and write gcda files. And we have to then run
> gcov or lcov as
> >         > normal.
> >
> >
> >     This is just a description of how it works. Not a particular change.
> >
> >         >
> >         > It is the path to another report format.
> >
> >         I am not sure I understand how we make this work and how we
> support the
> >         user. Is
> >         this an option to 'rtems-test'?
> >
> >         The aim of the 'rtems-test' command is to provide a documented
> user
> >         interface.
> >         Providing direct access to covoar adds more documentation and
> >         complication to
> >         the test tool. For example how does the user wanting gcov output
> get to the
> >         trace files? The user would need to step into how we implement
> coverage
> >         and that
> >         is an interface we will not document and change.
> >
> >
> >     I wouldn't want a user to invoke covoar directly. It is just a
> coverage
> >     reporting variant at this point. I doubt it will ever be the default
> report
> >     format because we have details in the native reports that I don't
> think you
> >     can get ever with gcov. I think the native format is closer to what
> you
> >     would use on an analysis for the highest level of coverage.
> >
> > once covoar can generate the gcov reports, we can add it as an option to
> rtems test.
> > we can generate a file with the list of the notes/trace files from the
> script
> > which will work as an
> > input to covoar, the user won't have to do anything manually.
>
> Thank you. I now understand.
>
> Chris
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20180712/eb66e7b5/attachment-0002.html>