This is the mail archive of the
systemtap@sourceware.org
mailing list for the systemtap project.
[Bug translator/4529] tapset coverage option
- From: "wcohen at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org>
- To: systemtap at sources dot redhat dot com
- Date: 24 May 2007 20:21:09 -0000
- Subject: [Bug translator/4529] tapset coverage option
- References: <20070521164611.4529.fche@redhat.com>
- Reply-to: sourceware-bugzilla at sourceware dot org
------- Additional Comments From wcohen at redhat dot com 2007-05-24 21:21 -------
Currently there is no information about what parts of the tapset and
scripts are exercised during testing. Systemtap needs some way
determining what sections of tapsets and scripts are executed.
Code coverage techniques have already been implemented in GCC for
various languages compiled by GCC.
http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.2.0/gcc/Gcov.html#Gcov
The code coverage of kernel code has also been implemented with
extensions to GCOV:
http://ltp.sourceforge.net/coverage/
The C code compiled with the gcc options (`-fprofile-arcs
-ftest-coverage') writes out information to files (x.gcno). When the
compiled code is run, data is written into x.gcda file. It seems like
systemtap generated code could generate compatible files, so that
analysis could be done lcov.
Where to put the files?
In the same directory as the original script .stp?
How to deal with the tapsets in separate directories?
Make use of the GCOV_PREFIX_STRIP and GCOV_PREFIX env variables?
--
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
AssignedTo|systemtap at sources dot |wcohen at redhat dot com
|redhat dot com |
Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=4529
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.