rtems-tools: coverage covoar GSoC merge

[Chris Johns]

On 04/05/2018 09:04, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On Thu, May 3, 2018 at 1:45 PM, Vijay Kumar Banerjee <vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com
> <mailto:vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>     On 3 May 2018 at 22:58, Cillian O'Donnell <cpodonnell8 at gmail.com
>     <mailto:cpodonnell8 at gmail.com>> wrote:
>         On Thu, 3 May 2018, 16:23 Vijay Kumar Banerjee,
>         <vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com <mailto:vijaykumar9597 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
>             Hello,
> 
>             I want to ask some things about the project to get a clear
>             understanding of the objectives/milestones and current status of the
>             project. I also seek advice on my Tasks/obectives.
> 
>             1. The covoar has been updated to read symbols from the library and
>             the next milestone is to remove covoar's dependancy on the external
>             tools, which Chris is working on . ( Is that correct? )
> 
>          
>         Looks like it won't be necessary for gsoc, so we won't have to wait for
>         their removal. Chris might still have some other changes to make though
>         and then we can pull master and branch off from there.
> 
>     Understood. 
> 
> If it is working as is, you are OK to work on GSoC objectives. Emphasis on the
> "working" part. 
> If something is broken right now, we want to fix it. :)

Agreed.

> We also want to make sure all of the previous work is merged into the master.
> There may be
> clean up left for this. Cillian is the best person to answer this one.

Has patches for this been posted? If they have I may have dropped the ball by
not handling them.

> Chris has identified things to improve covoar which are not all required to be
> done now. 

Yes. I am working on removing addr2line as the first step.

>             2. after it is done , the next step,I think, would be to update the
>             coverage.py and test.py with the changes in covoar.
> 
> 
>         Yeah getting all the rtems tester code up to a standard that Chris will
>         be happy to merge it will be the next step.
> 
>     So basically we wait for Chris to make the changes to covoar, needed for us
>     to start working on coverage code to make it running and up to the standards. 
> 
> Chris can answer this. But if it works and produces coverage reports, it is ready.
> If it is broken, report it.  

This is correct. The tools currently is host specific and my work is to make it
native and contained so it is portable.

> All clean up and removal of external tools should not impact your project if the
> code is working now. :)

I agree.

Chris