Changes between Version 1 and Version 2 of SOCIS/2015/Final_Report


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Oct 21, 2015, 2:29:21 PM (5 years ago)
Author:
hermann19829
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • SOCIS/2015/Final_Report

    v1 v2  
    88
    99== Hermann Felbinger: Improve Code Coverage Analysis Meeting Aviation and Automotive Standards ==
     10The goal of this project is to improve the reporting of structural coverage analysis on testing RTEMS. The existing coverage analysis implementation supports statement and branch coverage. Mainly the tool for generating reports of this coverage analysis implementation is updated.
     11The detailed coverage analyisis reports are generated providing hints to uncovered code fragments depending on the used coverage metrics. Further the coverage analysis tool is extended to evaluate also MC/DC (Modified Condition/Decision Coverage).
    1012
     13In this project the planned work was to improve the coverage analysis of RTEMS. According to the ISO 26262 certification standard in automotive industry and the DO-178C for software-based avionics systems the evaluation of a complete test suite is based on different structural code coverage metrics. These metrics are statement, decision, and MC/DC. The metrics are selected on the Safety Integrity Level (SIL) (=potential for a safety hazard from A to D, where D is highest). E.g. a software application which is assigned a SIL level of D is required to achieve 100% MC/DC coverage. To use an operating system like RTEMS in safety related applications also RTEMS has to achieve 100% coverage. In this project an update of the existing coverage reporting application, which was implemented at SOCIS 2014, is provided.
     14
     15I analyzed the capabilities of the instrumented QEMU emulator, called Couverture QEMU, to see for which CPU types the existing coverage analyzer and report generator can be used. Couverture QEMU generates the execution traces which are analyzed to generate coverage reports. I configured and built the existing tools for LEON2 and PC386 CPU. Running the coverage analysis for LEON2 yielded an issue caused by a mismatch of byte sizes of the execution traces and the symbols from the analyzed libraries. Together with Joel and Gedare we found and implemented a solution for this issue. Then coverage reports for PC386 and LEON2 were generated.
     16Further hard coded paths were eliminated from configuration files pointing to the analyzed libraries and to instrumented object files (.gcno) which are produced by the gcc compiler. Then I started working on the verification of coverage results produced by gcov and a possibility to identify control statements in source code such that branches from execution traces can be mapped to conditions within a decision in the source code.
     17
     18Documentation of the work in progress can be found in the [http://socis2015rtems.blogspot.co.com/ blog].
    1119== Saeed Ehteshamifar: RTEMS Fault tolerance ==
    1220