Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Code coverage integration in SRF #105

Merged
18 commits merged into from
Jul 13, 2022
Merged

Conversation

drobison00
Copy link
Contributor

Steps to test/experiment:

  • Build in debug mode with SRF_WITH_CODECOV=ON
  • Run all tests/code that will touch libsrf/libpysrf
    cd ./build && ctest && pytest ./python/tests
  • Build the gcovr report
    cmake --build ./build --target gcovr-html-report
  • Open the HTML report
    xdg-open ./build/gcovr-html-report/index.html

@drobison00 drobison00 requested review from a team as code owners June 29, 2022 22:36
ci/Jenkinsfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: David Gardner <[email protected]>
ci/Jenkinsfile Show resolved Hide resolved
ci/Jenkinsfile Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@ryanolson ryanolson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is a great addition.

My only requested change is to add directions on we should be using it in the CONTRIBUTING.md.

@drobison00 drobison00 changed the title Draft: POC for code coverage integration in SRF Code coverage integration in SRF Jul 7, 2022
@drobison00 drobison00 added improvement Improvement to existing functionality non-breaking Non-breaking change ready for review labels Jul 7, 2022
@drobison00 drobison00 added the feature request New feature or request label Jul 7, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@dagardner-nv dagardner-nv left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The more CI stages the merrier!

Copy link
Contributor

@mdemoret-nv mdemoret-nv left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think that the CMake configuration could be simplified and we should consider options that reduce the duplicate CI work. i.e. Do we need to build in both debug and release? Do we need to test in both debug and release?

CMakeLists.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
CONTRIBUTING.md Show resolved Hide resolved
protos/CMakeLists.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
scripts/gen_coverage.sh Show resolved Hide resolved
CMakeLists.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cmake/setup_coverage.cmake Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
cmake/setup_coverage.cmake Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
CMakeLists.txt Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
ci/Jenkinsfile Show resolved Hide resolved
ci/Jenkinsfile Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@mdemoret-nv mdemoret-nv left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good now

@mdemoret-nv
Copy link
Contributor

@gpucibot merge

This pull request was closed.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature request New feature or request improvement Improvement to existing functionality non-breaking Non-breaking change
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants