Re: Git Test Coverage Report (Tuesday, Sept 25)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 9/25/2018 2:42 PM, Derrick Stolee wrote:
In an effort to ensure new code is reasonably covered by the test suite, we now have contrib/coverage-diff.sh to combine the gcov output from 'make coverage-test ; make coverage-report' with the output from 'git diff A B' to discover _new_ lines of code that are not covered.

This report takes the output of these results after running on four branches:

         pu: 80e728fa913dc3a1165b6dec9a7afa6052a86325

        jch: 0c10634844314ab89666ed0a1c7d36dde7ac9689

       next: 76f2f5c1e34c4dbef1029e2984c2892894c444ce

     master: fe8321ec057f9231c26c29b364721568e58040f7

master@{1}: 2d3b1c576c85b7f5db1f418907af00ab88e0c303

I ran the test suite on each of these branches on an Ubuntu Linux VM, and I'm missing some dependencies (like apache, svn, and perforce) so not all tests are run.

I submit this output without comment. I'm taking a look especially at my own lines to see where coverage can be improved.


Thanks for driving this. I think it provides an interesting view into new code and how well it is being tested. In an effort to make this as useful as possible, we should be looking to eliminate as much noise as possible otherwise people will stop looking at it.

I looked at the lines that came from my patches and most if not all of them are only going to be executed by the test suite if the correct "special setup" option is enabled. In my particular case, that is the option "GIT_TEST_INDEX_THREADS=<n>" as documented in t/README.

I suspect this will be the case for other code as well so I wonder if the tests should be run with each the GIT_TEST_* options that exist to exercise uncommon code paths with the test suite. This should prevent false positives on code paths that are actually covered by the test suite as long as it is run with the appropriate option set.

I realize it would take a long time to run the entire test suite with all GIT_TEST_* variables so perhaps they can only be tested "as needed" (ie when patches add new variables in the "special setups" section of t/README). This should reduce the number of combinations that need to be run while still eliminating many of the false positive hits.




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux