This is the mail archive of the systemtap@sourceware.org mailing list for the systemtap project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Translator test coverage


It has been a while since I have run test coverage tests, so I decided that it would probably be a good to generate that information again to see what parts of the translator are exercised by the translator and the runtime tests. After fixing things for the string keyword in the runtime tests, I generated the new coverage information. It is posted on http://people.redhat.com/wcohen

http://people.redhat.com/wcohen/stap-trans-tests-20060517/
http://people.redhat.com/wcohen/stap-run-tests-20060517/

Some comments about the what I saw in the test results. There are a number of options in stap that are unexercised. There should be tests that exercise the options:

"-vv" verbose >= 2, this should also trigger a lot additional code coverage

"-p0" and "-p6" a .ko test to check that error checking for pass number

"-I", "-R", "-m", "-r", "-k", "-s", "-c", "-x", "-h"

There isn't much exercise of the throw/catch paths in the code. Either parse or semantic errors. Need some additional .ko tests to exercise this paths.

The tapsets.cxx and staptree.cxx are the files that have the least amount of coverage.

A number of members in mark_derived_probe, mark_builder, and hrtimer_derived_probe in tapsets.cxx are not exercised.

The testing for the printf specification could be more complete in staptree.cxx, "%X" and "%n" and justification arguments.

staptree.cxx looks to have code to regenerate the script from the internal parse tree. None of that code seems to be exercised.

-Will


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]