> I would.focus first on running coverture-qemu instead regular qemu. This > includes the rsb support but is just focused on parity with no coverage.
Ok, so right now I should forget about the coverage. Run the tests normally (qemu) and then with couverture-qemu for all the bsps couverture supports. This confirms that couverture is working correctly before the rsb switch. Then in terms of the rsb support, do I just grep for qemu in the rsb and go through the files one by one and change things. Thanks, Cillian. On 4 June 2017 at 11:58, Joel Sherrill <j...@rtems.org> wrote: > I would.focus first on running coverture-qemu instead regular qemu. This > includes the rsb support but is just focused on parity with no coverage. > > Then run coverture-qemu with coverage on by hand and see if it gets the > output either the old or new scripts expect. Do this with just one test. > > Then fix and update patches as needed so RTEMS-tester can enable a coverage > run. > > While testing the old stuff, I had it in parts for testing purposes: running > with coverage and generating reports. I would run the report side over and > over on the same output. > > So sorry about one step at a time. The old scripts were intended to be a > reference for you. That was a working procedure. > > --joel > > On Jun 4, 2017 5:37 AM, "Cillian O'Donnell" <cpodonne...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Chris, >> >> > Which BSPs that support qemu are missing from the rtems-test tool? >> >> >> I suppose I had been thinking in terms of coverage and all I have is >> coverage.mc files for PC386, Leon 2 and Leon 3 but now that I'm >> thinking about it maybe all I need to do is to run the tests for qemu >> and couverture-qemu and compare the results and if they're similar I >> know couverture is working fine and I can move onto the RSB work. I'm >> looking for a bit of clarification myself. >> >> > first the ability to run a specific qemu for a BSP >> >> >> As I had understood it, we were swapping out qemu for couverture-qemu, >> there was no need to have both, although I could be wrong. >> >> >> > Where is the repo with the RTEMS Tester you are working on? >> >> All the changes are local at the moment, I have been holding off >> making the commits as I haven't been able to get coverage to >> successfully run yet. I'm hoping if I can get those bsps to run then >> I'll try and begin to get everything merged and get cracking on the >> rest of the bsps. The current state of things is I've managed to >> insulate the coverage work so it's at least no longer breaking what's >> already there and the coverage runs are all running into errors in >> qemu.cfg, probably the bsp options in the coverage.mc files, not sure >> what to use yet. All tests invalid, default to dry-run >> >> Thanks, >> >> Cillian. >> >> On 4 June 2017 at 03:56, Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org> wrote: >> > On 3/6/17 10:14 pm, Cillian O'Donnell wrote: >> >> >> >> I've just realised that I've been fixing problems with the RTEMS >> >> Tester work that has already been done to convert bash scripts to >> >> python, but I probably should of first been trying to get the old >> >> sim-scripts method working from rtems-testing repo because this will >> >> give me more bsps to test qemu with. So I'm now trying to fix the >> >> do_coverage runtime errors due to covoar and its related files being >> >> moved to RTEMS Tester. >> > >> > I would prefer we do not invest more time in the scripts in the >> > rtems-testing >> > repo. I personally would like to move this repo to under Joel so it >> > becomes a >> > personal repo for him and away from the top level because a new user >> > could think >> > this is the way to test. >> > >> > Which BSPs that support qemu are missing from the rtems-test tool? >> > >> >> I just want to confirm if I'm heading in the right direction. First >> >> get the old sim-scripts method working. Test qemu against >> >> couverture-qemu for bsps common to both. Then do the RSB support for >> >> couverture-qemu. Then get the RTEMS Tester work running and convert >> >> the rest of the sim-scripts. Is that right, or should I continue with >> >> the RTEMS Tester work? >> > >> > I see 2 parts to the RTEMS Tester work, first the ability to run a >> > specific qemu >> > for a BSP and the integration of the coverage support. Is this correct? >> > >> > Where is the repo with the RTEMS Tester you are working on? I saw a post >> > the >> > other day with some extra output and was wanting to ask. >> > >> > Chris >> _______________________________________________ >> devel mailing list >> devel@rtems.org >> http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
