[PATCH] Generate coverage analysis Report

[Chris Johns]

On 31/5/18 6:44 am, Vijay Kumar Banerjee wrote:
> On 31 May 2018 at 02:02, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org <mailto:joel at rtems.org>>
> wrote:
>     On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 3:29 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee
>     <vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com <mailto:vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>         On 31 May 2018 at 00:28, Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org
>         <mailto:joel at rtems.org>> wrote:
>             I may not understand correctly but there is test_run and
>             coverage_run. Someone
>             suggested making coverage_running an option to test_run. If that's
>             what's being
>             asked for, then I think doing it in a follow up patch is OK.
> 
>             If that's the intended request, perhaps a ticket should be filed.
>              
> 
>         Sorry for all the confusion.
>         This patch doesn't change the way test works. It only adds an option to run 
>         the coverage script. coverage_run just runs the coverage.coverage_run
> 
> 
>     :) And I am saying if we want to have one test_run with an argument, do it as
>     a future work iteration. File a ticket. 
> 
>     We need to get the code working on the master.
> 
> Okay, we can keep that as a future work (I haven't thought about it though). :)
> Getting it to work on master is our primary objective. 
> 

Was a ticket raised to removing 'coverage_run' and to use 'test_run'?

Chris