Hi all, On the below I was going to suggest, is it possible to have JCov metrics from other non-published tests and sources run on various environments and then combine them with the public version (from our servers).
John Oliver did a patch for JaCoCO long ago, that way we can see pathways from other tests which only improve overall coverage metrics. Is there something available with the JCov tool itself ? Is this an idea that is feasible ? Cheers, Mani -- @theNeomatrix369 <http://twitter.com/theNeomatrix369>* | **Blog <http://neomatrix369.wordpress.com/>** | *LJC Associate & LJC Advocate (@adoptopenjdk & @adoptajsr programs) *Meet-a-Project - *MutabilityDetector <https://github.com/MutabilityDetector>* | **Bitbucket <https://bitbucket.org/neomatrix369>* * | **Github <https://github.com/neomatrix369>* * | **LinkedIn <http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/mani-sarkar/71/a77/39b>* *Come to Devoxx UK 2015:* http://www.devoxx.co.uk/ *Don't chase success, rather aim for "Excellence", and success will come chasing after you!* > Message: 4 > Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2015 17:28:11 +0000 > From: Martijn Verburg <martijnverb...@gmail.com> > To: "Rory O'Donnell" <rory.odonn...@oracle.com> > Cc: "quality-discuss@openjdk.java.net" > <quality-discuss@openjdk.java.net> > Subject: Re: We have some Code Coverage results from JCov/JTreg! > Message-ID: > < > cap7yuas4rkwjfybhci_r5q0qr08mpr-sz_7hnxrln6n39cp...@mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Hi Rory, > > Understood - it will be good to be able to encourage various OpenJDK > members to contribute / port tests into it and measure that. Small steps > :-). > > On 19 January 2015 at 16:35, Rory O'Donnell <rory.odonn...@oracle.com> > wrote: > > > > > On 19/01/2015 15:36, Martijn Verburg wrote: > > > > Hi Rory, > > > > Thanks - we're looking into the existing Cloudbees Jenkins instance to > > do this. > > > > ok > > > > A second question quick question - do the numbers we're publishing look > > right compared to your internal ones? > > > > Appreciate non OpenJDK tests run by Oracle means that they cover more. > > > > Comparing our internal numbers with yours would be like comparing apples > > with pears > > I'm afraid. > > > > Rgds,Rory > > > > Cheers, > > Martijn > > > > On 19 January 2015 at 15:18, Rory O'Donnell <rory.odonn...@oracle.com> > > wrote: > > > >> > >> On 19/01/2015 10:55, Martijn Verburg wrote: > >> > >>> Hi all, > >>> > >>> John Oliver and Mani Sarkar spent some time on the most recent Adopt > >>> OpenJDK hackday and managed to get what looks like to be meaningful > code > >>> coverage numbers for OpenJDK using the jcov/jtreg tools: > >>> > >>> Results for jdk9: http://sticky.uwcs.co.uk/jcov/ > >>> > >>> ========Code Tools Dev======== > >>> > >>> The configuration John used was as follows (is this the correct usage > >>> pattern?): > >>> > >>> Build jdk images > >>> install jtreg with the jcov > >>> > >>> export the normal vars: > >>> > >>> ``` > >>> export SOURCE_CODE=/home/joliver/workspace/jdk9/ > >>> export JTREG_INSTALL=/home/joliver/workspace/jtreg > >>> export JT_HOME=$JTREG_INSTALL > >>> export JTREG_HOME=$JTREG_INSTALL > >>> export > >>> > PRODUCT_HOME=$SOURCE_CODE/build/linux-x86_64-normal-server-release/images/jdk > >>> > >>> export JPRT_JTREG_HOME=${JT_HOME} > >>> export JPRT_JAVA_HOME=${PRODUCT_HOME} > >>> export JTREG_TIMEOUT_FACTOR=5 > >>> export CONCURRENCY=8 > >>> ``` > >>> > >>> cd into jdk/test > >>> > >>> edit the Makefile and add the following: > >>> > >>> ``` > >>> jdkroot=/home/joliver/workspace/jdk9/ > >>> > >>> JTREG_TEST_OPTIONS += > >>> > -jcov/classes:$(jdkroot)/build/linux-x86_64-normal-server-release/jdk/modules/java.base > >>> JTREG_TEST_OPTIONS += > >>> -jcov/source:$(jdkroot)/jdk/src/java.base/share/classes > >>> JTREG_TEST_OPTIONS += -jcov/include:* > >>> ``` > >>> > >>> just before the line: # Make sure jtreg exists > >>> > >>> then just run "make test" inside the root > >>> > >>> =======Quality Discuss======= > >>> > >> Hi Martijn, > >> > >> Posting the results on our wiki won't work, so I can provide a link to > the > >> results. Let me know when you have decided on the link locations. > >> > >> Rgds,Rory > >> > >>> > >>> Is this something that could be hosted by the quality group for the > >>> major OpenJDK code lines (7u, 8u and jdk9)? > >>> > >>> If not then the Adoption Group can host it on one of their external > >>> servers temporarily and we could link to that from the wiki(s)/project > >>> page(s). > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Martijn > >>> > >> > >> -- > >> Rgds,Rory O'Donnell > >> Quality Engineering Manager > >> Oracle EMEA , Dublin, Ireland > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Rgds,Rory O'Donnell > > Quality Engineering Manager > > Oracle EMEA , Dublin, Ireland > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: < > http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/quality-discuss/attachments/20150119/2c08545b/attachment.html > > > > End of quality-discuss Digest, Vol 39, Issue 4 > **********************************************
