similar to: [LLVMdev] DejaGnu test-suite coverage

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "[LLVMdev] DejaGnu test-suite coverage"

2008 May 28
0
[LLVMdev] DejaGnu test-suite coverage
On May 26, 2008, at 9:05 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > Hello, > > After a fun discussion regarding unit testing and coverage metrics, > it came up that we don't have coverage analysis for LLVM proper. > With a certain amount of experience in this arena, I set about > building a nice overview. I don't have the toolset and commands > fully integrated into the
2008 May 27
0
[LLVMdev] DejaGnu test-suite coverage
On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:27 PM, Gabor Greif <gabor at mac.com> wrote: > Heh, > > my ex-boss would die seeing something like this :-) It's not too hard to produce, let me know if you want details, or ping me on IRC. > Just one comment, does GCOV have a flag for > a third category of lines, like "undesired to execute"? Nope. I'm a subscriber to the
2008 May 27
2
[LLVMdev] DejaGnu test-suite coverage
Heh, my ex-boss would die seeing something like this :-) Just one comment, does GCOV have a flag for a third category of lines, like "undesired to execute"? This would make the summary of <http://chandlerc.net/llvm-coverage/lib/Target/PowerPC/ PPCHazardRecognizers.cpp.gcov.html> much more favorable. Nice work! Cheers, Gabor
2008 May 28
2
[LLVMdev] DejaGnu test-suite coverage
On May 26, 2008, at 11:55 PM, Chandler Carruth wrote: > This would make the summary of > <http://chandlerc.net/llvm-coverage/lib/Target/PowerPC/ > PPCHazardRecognizers.cpp.gcov.html> > much more favorable. > > I'm not seeing the bad aspect of this particular file? It has pretty > good coverage, is code calling into this "bad"? If so, then >
2008 May 28
0
[LLVMdev] DejaGnu test-suite coverage
On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 8:50 PM, Chris Lattner <sabre at nondot.org> wrote: > I think he means the lines like: > > switch (Opcode) { > > default: assert(0 && "Unknown load!"); > > > where the default case is never executed. > > I would personally appreciate expected to fail tests that ensure the assertions actually catch the bad inputs
2008 May 28
1
[LLVMdev] DejaGnu test-suite coverage
Hi, > > I think he means the lines like: > > > > switch (Opcode) { > > > > default: assert(0 && "Unknown load!"); > > > > > > where the default case is never executed. > > > I would personally appreciate expected to fail tests that ensure the > assertions actually catch the bad inputs that they were designed to
2017 Aug 23
2
LLVM development trunk - code coverage - branch coverage missing
Hi , I could see the LLVM code coverage info at the below links http://lab.llvm.org:8080/coverage/coverage-reports/clang/index.html http://llvm.org/reports/coverage/ I am interested in the branch coverage metric. I could not find the branch coverage related info . Can anyone let me know how to find it. If it is not available , I am happy to work on it, if I can get some details on why
2020 Apr 26
2
How to get branch coverage by using 'source-based code coverage'
Hi, llvm/clang experts I need to get the branch coverage for some testing code. But i found gcov can't give a expected coverage which may count some 'hidden branch' in (See stackoverflow answer <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/42003783/lcov-gcov-branch-coverage-with-c-producing-branches-all-over-the-place>). Instead, I turn to use clang and the 'source-based code
2020 May 03
2
[EXTERNAL] How to get branch coverage by using 'source-based code coverage'
Hi, Alan Really very excited to receive your email and sorry to be slow replying, it has been exceptionally busy over the last few days ;( Your explanation made the problem clear to me. So gcov branch coverage should be called condition coverage and clang region coverage is branch coverage in fact(also known as *decision/C1*), right? And llvm/clang will support all the following coverage
2016 Sep 23
2
A new code coverage bot
I've configured the bot to test lld and polly. The first batch of reports for the new tools are not ready yet, but anyone can monitor the build: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/green/view/Experimental/job/clang-stage2-coverage-R/ Matthias, I will ask around about adding a link to this bot on llvm.org once it graduates from the Experimental pane on greendragon. thanks, vedant > On Sep 23,
2016 May 16
5
Coverage Update on http://llvm.org/reports/coverage/
Hi, Anyone knows who is involved with this page on llvm.org? Which bot is updating it? (it seems stalled right now) Thanks, Mehdi
2016 May 19
2
Coverage Update on http://llvm.org/reports/coverage/
> On May 19, 2016, at 8:59 AM, Sylvestre Ledru <sylvestre at debian.org> wrote: > > Le 16/05/2016 à 19:19, Mehdi Amini a écrit : >> Hi, >> >> Anyone knows who is involved with this page on llvm.org? Which bot is updating it? (it seems stalled right now) > This is now fixed: http://llvm.org/reports/coverage/ > I skimmed the results, and it seems that there
2014 Feb 18
2
[LLVMdev] asan coverage
On Feb 17, 2014, at 5:13 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > Then my question: will there be any objection if I disentangle AsanCoverage from ASan and make it a separate LLVM phase with the proper clang driver support? > Or it will be an unwelcome competition with the planned clang coverage? I don’t view it as a competition, but assuming that we both succeed in our
2015 Apr 28
4
[LLVMdev] GCC compatibility code coverage issue .
Hi All, We trying to use clang+llvm to generate the gcc coverage format as clang version 3.6.0 $clang --coverage -Xclang -coverage-cfg-checksum -Xclang -coverage-no-function-names-in-data -Xclang -coverage-version='407*' test.c $a.out $llvm-cov gcov test.gcda Unexpected version: *704. Invalid .gcno File! Debugging the above cause ,But any hints from experts here ,will help a lot
2009 Oct 22
0
Mapstraction v2 test suite and state of coverage?
Hi,I''m just starting to take a look at Mapstaction, it seems like a great library. I''m particularly liking the structure of v2. I have a couple of questions: - Is there is any kind of test suite for v2? - I''ve been trying to use the Openlayers provider and I have been running into some problems, it seems like the v2 implementation might not be completed yet. Is there
2018 Dec 28
2
LLVM Coverage Viewer
Hi All, I created a CLI tool that converts llvm coverage report JSON to a single HTML file that can be viewed locally. The tool is distributed from npm here https://www.npmjs.com/package/llvm-coverage-viewer . The code is hosted on github here https://github.com/hooddanielc/llvm-coverage-viewer. For any questions or concerns, please let me know or make an issue on github page. Hope this helps,
2016 Sep 20
2
-sanitizer-coverage-prune-blocks=true and LibFuzzer
Hello LLVM devs, I'm running lots of experiments with LibFuzzer these days -- it's an amazing tool! I've noticed something weird while examining the effect of various coverage options: for one of my benchmarks, the fuzzer was achieving a higher total coverage before April 2016, when -sanitizer-coverage-prune-blocks became true by default (commit
2017 Jun 14
3
LLVM coverage report
Hi Sylvestre, it seems the code coverage runs are not updated since a couple of months. http://llvm.org/reports/coverage/tools/polly/lib/Support/SCEVValidator.cpp.gcov.html The last run was on 2017-05-20 02:07:48. Are you still maintaining these? Is this on purpose? Any chance this could be fixed? Best, Tobias
2016 Sep 24
4
A new code coverage bot
The bot hiccupped earlier but looks stable now. The average turnaround seems to be 3.5 hours. clang: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/coverage/coverage-reports/clang/index.html lld: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/coverage/coverage-reports/lld/index.html polly: http://lab.llvm.org:8080/coverage/coverage-reports/polly/index.html > On Sep 23, 2016, at 11:58 PM, Tobias Grosser via llvm-dev
2015 May 20
2
[LLVMdev] why is coverage map and profile names mixed?
Hi I'm referencing the method: Lib/Transforms/Instrumentation/InstrProfiling.cpp:InstrProfiling::lowerCoverageData() At the end of the function, why is the variable being placed in __llvm_prf_names section? Shouldn't it be placed in __llvm_covmap section? Thanks Ali -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: