rtems-test and test coverage doubts
sparacuellos at orbitalcs.com
Wed Feb 22 07:32:16 UTC 2017
First of all sorry for my english. I am new in this list and I have been
playing a couple of weeks with rtems. I am using branch 4.11 of the git
repository and I have several doubts in how the testing should be done and
which is the way to do a good coverage testing.
So, I start from the beginning.
First, I have noted that the rtems source builder in branch 4.11 uses, as
expected, branch 4.11 of the rtems-tools git repository. This branch seems
to have some problems with rtems-test to be working well on linux. Looking
at the repository I could see that this problems have been fixed in 4.10
branch (and also another changes applied which has not been applied for
4.11) and master but not in 4.11 and I was wondering If version 4.11 is a
good start point for doing something. Of course, fix this problems is
straightforward and I can run rtems-tests without problems, but just to
know, I am asking now.
The other doubt is what would be a good approach to do coverage tests. It
seems to exist two approachs to do this process: one is using rtems-testing
repository and other one is using rtems-tools. I am confused because in
branch 4.11 rtems-testing repository with the configure options used in the
scripts, rtems does not compile because of
RTEMS_DO_NOT_INLINE_CORE_MUTEX_SEIZE. For working this correctly you have
to change "ISR_Level" to ISR_lock_Context * in
cpukit/score/src/coremutexseize.c. Because of this, I am thinking that this
is not the best way to do coverage tests (or nobody is using this). The
other approach is using rtems-tools repository and in some version of the
past there is a patch (
to add a --coverage option to rtems-tester. Again, this patch has not been
applied to rtems-tester in any version and I was wondering why. Also, this
coverture tests uses coverture-qemu (only i386?) and it seems that there is
nothing included in these days to do coverture testing in a real board. Am
I correct with these things? Is coverage testing in rtems being done in
these days? (last public reports are from 2014?) Rtems uses covoar utility
instead of just using gcov for example and I'd like to know or where I can
read the differences and reasons for this. And with all of this questions
(sorry, I know there are a lot) the main question could be the following:
What is a good way to do real coverage testing for rtems?
Thank you very much for your time. I really apreciate your help.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the users