mikros/rust
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
master
rust/tests/coverage/await_ready.cov-map

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

20 lines
645 B
Plaintext
Raw Permalink Normal View History

coverage: Add test to codify existing behavior Currently `await` is only counted towards coverage if the containing function is suspended and resumed at least once. A future commit will fix this and update the test to reflect the new behavior.
2024-09-05 19:52:32 -05:00
Function name: await_ready::await_ready
coverage: Extract `executor::block_on` from several async coverage tests By moving `block_on` to an auxiliary crate, we avoid having to keep a separate copy of it in every async test. (This also incorporates some small tweaks to the headers in `await_ready.rs`.)
2024-09-06 00:41:10 -05:00
Raw bytes (9): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, 0f, 01, 00, 1e]
coverage: Add test to codify existing behavior Currently `await` is only counted towards coverage if the containing function is suspended and resumed at least once. A future commit will fix this and update the test to reflect the new behavior.
2024-09-05 19:52:32 -05:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
coverage: Extract `executor::block_on` from several async coverage tests By moving `block_on` to an auxiliary crate, we avoid having to keep a separate copy of it in every async test. (This also incorporates some small tweaks to the headers in `await_ready.rs`.)
2024-09-06 00:41:10 -05:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 15, 1) to (start + 0, 30)
coverage: Include the highest counter ID seen in `.cov-map` dumps When making changes that have a large impact on coverage counter creation, this makes it easier to see whether the number of physical counters has changed. (The highest counter ID seen in coverage maps is not necessarily the same as the number of physical counters actually used by the instrumented code, but it's the best approximation we can get from looking only at the coverage maps, and it should be reasonably accurate in most cases.)
2024-10-07 21:13:05 -05:00
Highest counter ID seen: c0
coverage: Add test to codify existing behavior Currently `await` is only counted towards coverage if the containing function is suspended and resumed at least once. A future commit will fix this and update the test to reflect the new behavior.
2024-09-05 19:52:32 -05:00
Function name: await_ready::await_ready::{closure#0}
coverage: Extract `executor::block_on` from several async coverage tests By moving `block_on` to an auxiliary crate, we avoid having to keep a separate copy of it in every async test. (This also incorporates some small tweaks to the headers in `await_ready.rs`.)
2024-09-06 00:41:10 -05:00
Raw bytes (14): 0x[01, 01, 00, 02, 01, 0f, 1e, 03, 0f, 05, 04, 01, 00, 02]
coverage: Add test to codify existing behavior Currently `await` is only counted towards coverage if the containing function is suspended and resumed at least once. A future commit will fix this and update the test to reflect the new behavior.
2024-09-05 19:52:32 -05:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
coverage: Treat await similar to a macro Currently `await` is only counted towards coverage if the containing function is suspended and resumed at least once. This is because it expands to code which contains a branch on the discriminant of `Poll`. By treating it like a branching macro (e.g. `assert!`), these implementation details will be hidden from the coverage results.
2024-09-05 17:25:25 -05:00
Number of file 0 mappings: 2
coverage: Extract `executor::block_on` from several async coverage tests By moving `block_on` to an auxiliary crate, we avoid having to keep a separate copy of it in every async test. (This also incorporates some small tweaks to the headers in `await_ready.rs`.)
2024-09-06 00:41:10 -05:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 15, 30) to (start + 3, 15)
coverage: Treat await similar to a macro Currently `await` is only counted towards coverage if the containing function is suspended and resumed at least once. This is because it expands to code which contains a branch on the discriminant of `Poll`. By treating it like a branching macro (e.g. `assert!`), these implementation details will be hidden from the coverage results.
2024-09-05 17:25:25 -05:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 4, 1) to (start + 0, 2)
coverage: Include the highest counter ID seen in `.cov-map` dumps When making changes that have a large impact on coverage counter creation, this makes it easier to see whether the number of physical counters has changed. (The highest counter ID seen in coverage maps is not necessarily the same as the number of physical counters actually used by the instrumented code, but it's the best approximation we can get from looking only at the coverage maps, and it should be reasonably accurate in most cases.)
2024-10-07 21:13:05 -05:00
Highest counter ID seen: c1
coverage: Add test to codify existing behavior Currently `await` is only counted towards coverage if the containing function is suspended and resumed at least once. A future commit will fix this and update the test to reflect the new behavior.
2024-09-05 19:52:32 -05:00
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink