On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 4:45 PM Chris Johns <chr...@rtems.org> wrote:
> On 24/1/19 9:12 am, Jiri Gaisler wrote: > > After some trial and error, I got covoar to run with: > > Great. > > > However, the coverage is always 0% in the summary report: > > Does adding -v to the command line provide any more detail? Repeating -v > increases the level but things can become rather verbose and if you trip > full > DWARF tracing there is a lot of output. > I would be suspicious of the code that is invoked around CoverageReaderTSIM.cc:83 as a starting point. For some method you know you should be analyzed, there should be aCoverageMap. Since you are looking at only one executable, you could hard-code a test with address range of a single method under test to see what happens. Then if the "cover" variable isn't set correctly, then it won't have anything to process. I don't see any recent changes to the CoverageReaderQemu.cc so this probably is something wrong with the coverage data read from the file. If I had to guess. --joel > > 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
