[llvm-dev] [lld] - LLD (ELF) code covered by test cases.

[Galina Kistanova via llvm-dev]

Got the same idea.
Now need to figure out where to host the results.

Thanks

Galina

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 9:10 AM, Rafael Avila de Espindola <
rafael.espindola at gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks a lot for doing this.
>
> Having it automated an in a bot would be really nice.
>
> Cheers,
> Rafael
>
> George Rimar <grimar at accesssoftek.com> writes:
>
> > Hello guys,
> >
> > Today I tried to find the amount of LLD(elf) code covered by our test
> cases. So my aim was to run the LLD tests we have (run check-lld task) and
> find out which code was executed/covered and which was not.
> >
> > I used the approach from the next article to do that:
> > http://logan.tw/posts/2015/04/28/check-code-coverage-with-
> clang-and-lcov/#create-a-wrapper-script-for-lcov
> >
> > In short, it is based on using -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage clang
> flags and then generating the HTML report using lcov and genhtml tools.
> >
> > The results are actually not that bad (I expected we would have much
> more issues, but glad to see we seem don't :)
> > Coverage screenshot:
> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rjFdMA0HOjvz4vw_nDttv_dlbMiNYiaw/view
> >
> > We have few problematic places, but generally seems we cover the most of
> the code, except the few specific
> > errors and conditions. The full HTML report is available here:
> > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ROo9rZ4p7-IT68jI0nnhNMOqPNpk1l0c/view?
> usp=sharing
> >
> > Noticeable places I have to mention though are (we have some large code
> parts uncovered):
> >
> > 1) I was able to place `assert(false);` on line 386 below in ICF.cpp and
> all our tests pass.
> > (https://github.com/llvm-mirror/lld/blob/master/ELF/ICF.cpp#L386)
> >
> > 2) In Relocations.cpp, all code inside `if`:
> > https://github.com/llvm-mirror/lld/blob/master/ELF/Relocations.cpp#L1177
> > Is not covered by tests.
> >
> > 3) MicroMipsR6Thunk::writeTo(), MicroMipsR6Thunk::addSymbols(),
> > MicroMipsR6Thunk::getTargetInputSection() are not covered.
> >
> > That seems to be all major places I saw in report.
> >
> > Now we probably can think about what we can do with that?
> > * Ideal scenario I can imagine is that we could fix all the places and,
> for example, setup the watching bot
> > looking for LLD code coverage for each commit.
> > * Minimal scenario I see is to fix the major known places mentioned at
> least.
> >
> > What do you think guys??
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> > George | Developer | Access Softek, Inc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20180503/e9873f2e/attachment.html>