nordic-dev.net/rust
nordic-dev.net/rust
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust.git synced 2024-11-27 01:04:03 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
ba5ec1fc5c
rust/tests/coverage/inline.cov-map

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

77 lines
2.9 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: inline::display::<char>
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
Raw bytes (31): 0x[01, 01, 01, 01, 05, 05, 01, 29, 01, 00, 22, 05, 01, 09, 00, 0a, 03, 00, 0e, 00, 10, 05, 00, 11, 02, 06, 01, 03, 05, 01, 02]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
Number of expressions: 1
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- expression 0 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(1)
Number of file 0 mappings: 5
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 41, 1) to (start + 0, 34)
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 10)
- Code(Expression(0, Add)) at (prev + 0, 14) to (start + 0, 16)
= (c0 + c1)
coverage: Store each BCB's code regions in one coverage statement If a BCB has more than one code region, those extra regions can now all be stored in the same coverage statement, instead of being stored in additional statements.
2023-09-19 04:15:33 +00:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 0, 17) to (start + 2, 6)
coverage: Simplify counter expressions using simple algebra Some of these cases currently don't occur in practice, but are included for completeness, and to avoid having to add them later as branch coverage and MC/DC coverage start building more complex expressions.
2024-05-14 03:51:24 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 3, 5) to (start + 1, 2)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: inline::error
coverage: Skip spans that can't be un-expanded back to the function body When we extract coverage spans from MIR, we try to "un-expand" them back to spans that are inside the function's body span. In cases where that doesn't succeed, the current code just swaps in the entire body span instead. But that tends to result in coverage spans that are completely unrelated to the control flow of the affected code, so it's better to just discard those spans.
2023-11-26 11:20:16 +00:00
Raw bytes (9): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, 31, 01, 01, 14]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
coverage: Skip spans that can't be un-expanded back to the function body When we extract coverage spans from MIR, we try to "un-expand" them back to spans that are inside the function's body span. In cases where that doesn't succeed, the current code just swaps in the entire body span instead. But that tends to result in coverage spans that are completely unrelated to the control flow of the affected code, so it's better to just discard those spans.
2023-11-26 11:20:16 +00:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 49, 1) to (start + 1, 20)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Function name: inline::length::<char>
Raw bytes (9): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, 1e, 01, 02, 02]
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 30, 1) to (start + 2, 2)
Function name: inline::main
Raw bytes (9): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, 05, 01, 02, 02]
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 5, 1) to (start + 2, 2)
Function name: inline::permutate::<char>
coverage: Store each BCB's code regions in one coverage statement If a BCB has more than one code region, those extra regions can now all be stored in the same coverage statement, instead of being stored in additional statements.
2023-09-19 04:15:33 +00:00
Raw bytes (52): 0x[01, 01, 04, 01, 05, 02, 0d, 05, 0f, 09, 0d, 08, 01, 0f, 01, 02, 0e, 05, 02, 0f, 02, 06, 02, 02, 0f, 00, 14, 11, 01, 0d, 00, 0e, 06, 00, 12, 00, 16, 11, 00, 17, 04, 0a, 0d, 05, 0c, 02, 06, 0b, 03, 01, 00, 02]
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
coverage: Store each BCB's code regions in one coverage statement If a BCB has more than one code region, those extra regions can now all be stored in the same coverage statement, instead of being stored in additional statements.
2023-09-19 04:15:33 +00:00
Number of expressions: 4
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- expression 0 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(1)
- expression 1 operands: lhs = Expression(0, Sub), rhs = Counter(3)
coverage: Store each BCB's code regions in one coverage statement If a BCB has more than one code region, those extra regions can now all be stored in the same coverage statement, instead of being stored in additional statements.
2023-09-19 04:15:33 +00:00
- expression 2 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Expression(3, Add)
- expression 3 operands: lhs = Counter(2), rhs = Counter(3)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
Number of file 0 mappings: 8
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 15, 1) to (start + 2, 14)
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 2, 15) to (start + 2, 6)
- Code(Expression(0, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 15) to (start + 0, 20)
= (c0 - c1)
- Code(Counter(4)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 14)
- Code(Expression(1, Sub)) at (prev + 0, 18) to (start + 0, 22)
= ((c0 - c1) - c3)
coverage: Store each BCB's code regions in one coverage statement If a BCB has more than one code region, those extra regions can now all be stored in the same coverage statement, instead of being stored in additional statements.
2023-09-19 04:15:33 +00:00
- Code(Counter(4)) at (prev + 0, 23) to (start + 4, 10)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
- Code(Counter(3)) at (prev + 5, 12) to (start + 2, 6)
coverage: Store each BCB's code regions in one coverage statement If a BCB has more than one code region, those extra regions can now all be stored in the same coverage statement, instead of being stored in additional statements.
2023-09-19 04:15:33 +00:00
- Code(Expression(2, Add)) at (prev + 3, 1) to (start + 0, 2)
Copy most of `tests/run-coverage` into `tests/coverage-map/status-quo` The output of these tests is too complicated to comfortably verify by hand, but we can still use them to observe changes to the underlying mappings produced by codegen/LLVM. If these tests fail due to non-coverage changes (e.g. in HIR-to-MIR lowering or MIR optimizations), it should usually be OK to just `--bless` them, as long as the `run-coverage` test suite still works.
2023-08-14 11:29:41 +00:00
= (c1 + (c2 + c3))
Function name: inline::permutations::<char>
Raw bytes (9): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, 0a, 01, 03, 02]
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 10, 1) to (start + 3, 2)
Function name: inline::swap::<char>
Raw bytes (9): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, 23, 01, 04, 02]
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 35, 1) to (start + 4, 2)
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink