On 11/05/2013, at 6:13 PM, John Smith wrote:
> On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 2:51 AM, Justin Clift <jclift@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Heh, I personally have no idea with gcov/lcov stuff, so other people that
>> do have a clue with it would be the ones to respond. :)
>>
> My sincerest apologies if I misunderstand here, but... ( i cant tell
> if your kidding or not about not having a clue).
Wasn't kidding, so this was actually helpful. :)
Vijay, this lcov/gcov stuff is useful for the testing guys isn't it?
+ Justin
> gcov/lcov basically shows you how much of your codebase actually gets
> executed during your testing. First you create a baseline ('before')
> snapshot of your project. Then you run all of your tests. And then you
> take another 'after' snapshot of your project. By comparing the two
> snapshots you can now tell exactly what code was executed during your
> tests. This tells you how effective your tests are, and in which areas
> you may need to do more testing.
>
> So in the glusterfs case here, for example shows that about 80% all of
> 'socket.c' gets executed which is good. No immediate need to devise
> any new tests that explicitly utilize it.
>
> http://lbalbalba.x90x.net/lcov/glusterfs/rpc/rpc-transport/socket/src/socket.c.gcov.html
>
> On the other hand, 'read-only-common.c' does not get executed even
> once. So you may need to create a test that uses that code.
>
> http://lbalbalba.x90x.net/lcov/glusterfs/xlators/features/read-only/src/read-only-common.c.gcov.html
>
>
>
> Anyway, again my apologies if you knew this already.
>
>
> Hope this helps,
>
>
> Regards
>
>
> John Smith.
--
Open Source and Standards @ Red Hat
twitter.com/realjustinclift
