Changes between Version 96 and Version 97 of TBR/UserManual/RTEMS_Coverage_Analysis


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Jul 23, 2011, 5:36:59 PM (9 years ago)
Author:
Panzon
Comment:

/* Current Status */

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • TBR/UserManual/RTEMS_Coverage_Analysis

    v96 v97  
    261261The [wiki:Developer/Coverage/Status Code Coverage Status] section lists the RTEMS BSPs on which we are performing (or would like to perform) Object Code Coverage.  We would like to continue to grow this list.  If you know of a simulator that includes coverage analysis, please let us know.
    262262
    263 With the instruction level coverage of core of RTEMS (e.g. score, rtems, posix, and sapi directories) near 100%, we have expanded our attention to to include other non-networking portions of the cpukit.  The best way to find out which portions of the cpukit are not currently being included in coverage analysis is to look at the commented out lines calling ''filter_nm()'' in the method ''generate_symbols()'' in [http://www.rtems.org/viewvc/rtems-testing/rtems-coverage/do_coverage?view=markup rtems-testing/rtems-coverage/do_coverage]
     263With the instruction level coverage of core of RTEMS (e.g. score, rtems, posix, and sapi directories) near 100%, we have expanded our attention to include other non-networking portions of the cpukit.  The best way to find out which portions of the cpukit are not currently being included in coverage analysis is to look at the commented out lines calling ''filter_nm()'' in the method ''generate_symbols()'' in [http://www.rtems.org/viewvc/rtems-testing/rtems-coverage/do_coverage?view=markup rtems-testing/rtems-coverage/do_coverage]
    264264
    265265If you are interested in writing some simple parameter check error cases, then take a look at the branch taken/not taken coverage reports for the "core configuration". Some of these are a simple matter of adding missing test cases for bad parameter path.  Other cases are more difficult.  So if you run into trouble with the analysis, ask or skip it. A common pattern is this: