From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 39832 invoked by alias); 11 Jul 2017 13:21:26 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 39267 invoked by uid 89); 11 Jul 2017 13:21:25 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=mikhail, drive.google.com, UD:drive.google.com, drivegooglecom X-HELO: mx1.suse.de Received: from mx2.suse.de (HELO mx1.suse.de) (195.135.220.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 13:21:23 +0000 Received: from relay1.suse.de (charybdis-ext.suse.de [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63C43AC37; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 13:21:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: LCOV of current GCC To: Mikhail Maltsev Cc: David Malcolm , Richard Biener , GCC Development , Jan Hubicka References: <20cf5d7c-ee4f-9a83-d610-426333951804@suse.cz> <1493398430.9106.158.camel@redhat.com> <7122768e-91c4-ff5d-02da-dbd546cfbfaf@suse.cz> From: =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_Li=c5=a1ka?= Message-ID: <6dbace39-5e1e-b1a9-c11d-2c2f0fbd4814@suse.cz> Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 13:21:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2017-07/txt/msg00060.txt.bz2 On 07/02/2017 07:19 PM, Mikhail Maltsev wrote: > Hi all! > I noticed that you started to publish GCC test coverage data. About a > year ago I also experimented with GCC's coverage and would like to > share some possible improvement ideas for your scripts. > > I postprocess the coverage data with this script: > https://gist.github.com/miyuki-chan/943efe7d8e0eb72fdd74997c8a10d6c5 Hello. Thank you for the notes. As my build is driven by buildbot I decided to incorporate your changes: > > It has the following features: > 1. removes gengtype routines from coverage data Done. > 2. removes code from system headers (e.g., the host libstdc++) Likewise. > 3. it outputs a summary (which can be used for building graphs, like > you do for benchmarks) Yep, written to my TODO list. Please be aware that we have some connection issues with gcc.opensuse.org, but updated LCOV will appear there soon. Thanks, Martin > > I hope, you might find some of these ideas helpful. > > > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 9:21 AM, Martin Liška wrote: >> On 04/28/2017 06:53 PM, David Malcolm wrote: >>> On Fri, 2017-04-28 at 11:38 +0200, Richard Biener wrote: >>>> On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Martin Liška >>>> wrote: >>>>> Hello. >>>>> >>>>> I've been working on some patches for GCOV and lcov was of my test >>>>> scenarios. >>>>> I'm sending link to static HTML pages made by the tool which are >>>>> recorded >>>>> for GCC (w/o bootstrap) build + running test-suite on x86_64-linux >>>>> -gnu. >>>>> I'm planning to set up a periodic build of that that will >>>>> eventually rsync >>>>> content to a public website: >>>>> >>>>> I guess it can be interesting for instance to see which folding >>>>> branches are >>>>> not used, or which files (functionality) is basically not much >>>>> tested via >>>>> the testsuite. >>>>> >>>>> https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0pisUJ80pO1X0s3eEpuQ25GTG8 >>>>> >>>>> P.S. I've noticed David fixed doxygen of the project, I can rsync >>>>> also that >>>>> to public website. >>>> >>>> Nice! Results look better than anticipated ;) >>>> >>>> Richard. >>>> >>>>> Martin >>> >>> Excellent; thanks. >> >> Hello. >> >> I've just done that, periodically built LCOV can be found here: >> >> http://gcc.opensuse.org/gcc-lcov/ >> >>> >>> For your periodic builds, please can you add "jit" to the enabled >>> languages (it will also need --enable-host-shared). >> >> Done that and will be seen in next build. I do it every weekend. >> >>> >>> Would be nice to add libiberty and libcpp to this, but maybe that needs >>> extra work? >> >> Yep, it's currently done for gcc subfolder. Can be done in the future. >> >> Martin >> >>> >>> Dave >>> >> > > >