mikros/rust
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
c924e93ad9
rust/tests/coverage/issue-84561.cov-map

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

192 lines
11 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 06:29:41 -05:00
Function name: <issue_84561::Foo as core::fmt::Debug>::fmt
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
Raw bytes (27): 0x[01, 01, 01, 01, 05, 04, 01, 8a, 01, 05, 01, 25, 05, 01, 25, 00, 26, 02, 01, 09, 00, 0f, 01, 01, 05, 00, 06]
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 06:29:41 -05:00
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- expression 0 operands: lhs = Counter(0), rhs = Counter(1)
Number of file 0 mappings: 4
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-15 20:40:01 -06:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 138, 5) to (start + 1, 37)
coverage: Handle fn signature spans more consistently near `?`
2023-10-17 02:58:35 -05:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 1, 37) to (start + 0, 38)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Expression(0, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 15)
= (c0 - c1)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 6)
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
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Function name: issue_84561::main
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-15 20:40:01 -06:00
Raw bytes (10): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, b4, 01, 01, 04, 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 06:29:41 -05:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-15 20:40:01 -06:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 180, 1) to (start + 4, 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: c0
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Function name: issue_84561::test1
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
Raw bytes (50): 0x[01, 01, 00, 09, 01, 9a, 01, 01, 01, 0b, 05, 01, 0c, 00, 1e, 01, 01, 05, 00, 0b, 09, 00, 0c, 00, 1e, 01, 01, 0d, 01, 0b, 0d, 01, 0c, 00, 1e, 01, 01, 05, 03, 0b, 11, 03, 0c, 00, 1e, 01, 01, 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 06:29:41 -05:00
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
Number of expressions: 0
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Number of file 0 mappings: 9
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-15 20:40:01 -06:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 154, 1) to (start + 1, 11)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 1, 12) to (start + 0, 30)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 11)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(2)) at (prev + 0, 12) to (start + 0, 30)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 1, 11)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(3)) at (prev + 1, 12) to (start + 0, 30)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 3, 11)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(4)) at (prev + 3, 12) to (start + 0, 30)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 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: c4
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Function name: issue_84561::test2
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
Raw bytes (20): 0x[01, 01, 00, 03, 01, b0, 01, 01, 01, 10, 05, 01, 11, 00, 23, 01, 01, 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 06:29:41 -05:00
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
Number of expressions: 0
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Number of file 0 mappings: 3
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-15 20:40:01 -06:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 176, 1) to (start + 1, 16)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 1, 17) to (start + 0, 35)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 1, 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
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Function name: issue_84561::test2::call_print
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-15 20:40:01 -06:00
Raw bytes (10): 0x[01, 01, 00, 01, 01, a7, 01, 09, 02, 0a]
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Number of files: 1
- file 0 => global file 1
Number of expressions: 0
Number of file 0 mappings: 1
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-15 20:40:01 -06:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 167, 9) to (start + 2, 10)
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
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Function name: issue_84561::test3
update coverage test
2024-06-25 17:06:27 -05:00
Raw bytes (375): 0x[01, 01, 31, 05, 09, 0d, 00, 15, 19, 12, 00, 15, 19, 21, 00, 1e, 00, 21, 00, 31, 00, 3d, 00, 2e, 45, 3d, 00, 42, 49, 45, 00, 3f, 51, 42, 49, 45, 00, 7a, 55, 51, 00, 7a, 55, 51, 00, 77, 5d, 7a, 55, 51, 00, 77, 61, 7a, 55, 51, 00, 72, 65, 77, 61, 7a, 55, 51, 00, 75, be, 01, c2, 01, 79, 69, 6d, 69, 6d, 69, 6d, c2, 01, 00, 69, 6d, c2, 01, 79, 69, 6d, bb, 01, 7d, 75, be, 01, c2, 01, 79, 69, 6d, b6, 01, 00, bb, 01, 7d, 75, be, 01, c2, 01, 79, 69, 6d, 33, 01, 08, 01, 03, 1c, 05, 04, 09, 01, 1c, 02, 02, 05, 04, 1f, 0d, 05, 05, 00, 1f, 06, 01, 05, 00, 1f, 15, 01, 09, 01, 1c, 12, 02, 05, 00, 1f, 0e, 01, 05, 00, 0f, 00, 00, 20, 00, 30, 21, 01, 05, 03, 0f, 00, 03, 20, 00, 30, 00, 00, 33, 00, 41, 00, 00, 4b, 00, 5a, 1e, 01, 05, 00, 0f, 00, 05, 09, 03, 10, 00, 05, 0d, 00, 1b, 00, 02, 0d, 00, 1c, 1a, 04, 09, 05, 06, 31, 06, 05, 03, 06, 22, 04, 05, 03, 06, 3d, 04, 09, 04, 06, 2e, 05, 08, 00, 0f, 45, 01, 09, 03, 0a, 2a, 05, 09, 03, 0a, 3f, 05, 08, 00, 0f, 51, 01, 09, 00, 13, 00, 03, 0d, 00, 1d, 3a, 03, 09, 00, 13, 00, 03, 0d, 00, 1d, 77, 03, 05, 00, 0f, 77, 01, 0c, 00, 13, 5d, 01, 0d, 00, 13, 56, 02, 0d, 00, 13, 72, 04, 05, 02, 13, 65, 03, 0d, 00, 13, 6e, 02, 0d, 00, 13, bb, 01, 03, 05, 00, 0f, 69, 01, 0c, 00, 13, 6d, 01, 0d, 03, 0e, 75, 04, 0d, 00, 13, c2, 01, 02, 0d, 00, 17, c2, 01, 01, 14, 00, 1b, 00, 01, 15, 00, 1b, 92, 01, 02, 15, 00, 1b, be, 01, 04, 0d, 00, 13, 7d, 03, 09, 00, 19, b6, 01, 02, 05, 00, 0f, b2, 01, 03, 09, 00, 22, 00, 02, 05, 00, 0f, 00, 03, 09, 00, 2c, 00, 02, 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 06:29:41 -05:00
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
Number of expressions: 49
update coverage test
2024-06-25 17:06:27 -05:00
- expression 0 operands: lhs = Counter(1), rhs = Counter(2)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
- expression 1 operands: lhs = Counter(3), rhs = Zero
update coverage test
2024-06-25 17:06:27 -05:00
- expression 2 operands: lhs = Counter(5), rhs = Counter(6)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
- expression 3 operands: lhs = Expression(4, Sub), rhs = Zero
update coverage test
2024-06-25 17:06:27 -05:00
- expression 4 operands: lhs = Counter(5), rhs = Counter(6)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
- expression 5 operands: lhs = Counter(8), rhs = Zero
- expression 6 operands: lhs = Expression(7, Sub), rhs = Zero
- expression 7 operands: lhs = Counter(8), rhs = Zero
- expression 8 operands: lhs = Counter(12), rhs = Zero
Dereference immutable borrows in GVN.
2024-01-05 15:52:58 -06:00
- expression 9 operands: lhs = Counter(15), rhs = Zero
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- expression 10 operands: lhs = Expression(11, Sub), rhs = Counter(17)
Dereference immutable borrows in GVN.
2024-01-05 15:52:58 -06:00
- expression 11 operands: lhs = Counter(15), rhs = Zero
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- expression 12 operands: lhs = Expression(16, Sub), rhs = Counter(18)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
- expression 13 operands: lhs = Counter(17), rhs = Zero
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- expression 14 operands: lhs = Expression(15, Add), rhs = Counter(20)
- expression 15 operands: lhs = Expression(16, Sub), rhs = Counter(18)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
- expression 16 operands: lhs = Counter(17), rhs = Zero
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- expression 17 operands: lhs = Expression(30, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 18 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Zero
- expression 19 operands: lhs = Expression(30, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
- expression 20 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Zero
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- expression 21 operands: lhs = Expression(29, Add), rhs = Counter(23)
- expression 22 operands: lhs = Expression(30, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 23 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Zero
- expression 24 operands: lhs = Expression(29, Add), rhs = Counter(24)
- expression 25 operands: lhs = Expression(30, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
- expression 26 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Zero
- expression 27 operands: lhs = Expression(28, Sub), rhs = Counter(25)
- expression 28 operands: lhs = Expression(29, Add), rhs = Counter(24)
- expression 29 operands: lhs = Expression(30, Sub), rhs = Counter(21)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
- expression 30 operands: lhs = Counter(20), rhs = Zero
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- expression 31 operands: lhs = Counter(29), rhs = Expression(47, Sub)
- expression 32 operands: lhs = Expression(48, Sub), rhs = Counter(30)
- expression 33 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 34 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 35 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 36 operands: lhs = Expression(48, Sub), rhs = Zero
- expression 37 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 38 operands: lhs = Expression(48, Sub), rhs = Counter(30)
- expression 39 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 40 operands: lhs = Expression(46, Add), rhs = Counter(31)
- expression 41 operands: lhs = Counter(29), rhs = Expression(47, Sub)
- expression 42 operands: lhs = Expression(48, Sub), rhs = Counter(30)
- expression 43 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
- expression 44 operands: lhs = Expression(45, Sub), rhs = Zero
- expression 45 operands: lhs = Expression(46, Add), rhs = Counter(31)
- expression 46 operands: lhs = Counter(29), rhs = Expression(47, Sub)
- expression 47 operands: lhs = Expression(48, Sub), rhs = Counter(30)
- expression 48 operands: lhs = Counter(26), rhs = Counter(27)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Number of file 0 mappings: 51
coverage: Add `#[rustfmt::skip]` to tests with non-standard formatting These tests deliberately use non-standard formatting, so that the line execution counts reported by `llvm-cov` reveal additional information about where code regions begin and end.
2024-01-15 20:40:01 -06:00
- Code(Counter(0)) at (prev + 8, 1) to (start + 3, 28)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(1)) at (prev + 4, 9) to (start + 1, 28)
- Code(Expression(0, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 5) to (start + 4, 31)
update coverage test
2024-06-25 17:06:27 -05:00
= (c1 - c2)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(3)) at (prev + 5, 5) to (start + 0, 31)
- Code(Expression(1, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 31)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
= (c3 - Zero)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(5)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 1, 28)
- Code(Expression(4, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 5) to (start + 0, 31)
update coverage test
2024-06-25 17:06:27 -05:00
= (c5 - c6)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Expression(3, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
update coverage test
2024-06-25 17:06:27 -05:00
= ((c5 - c6) - Zero)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 0, 32) to (start + 0, 48)
- Code(Counter(8)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 3, 15)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 3, 32) to (start + 0, 48)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 0, 51) to (start + 0, 65)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 0, 75) to (start + 0, 90)
- Code(Expression(7, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
= (c8 - Zero)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 5, 9) to (start + 3, 16)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 5, 13) to (start + 0, 27)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 2, 13) to (start + 0, 28)
- Code(Expression(6, Sub)) at (prev + 4, 9) to (start + 5, 6)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
= ((c8 - Zero) - Zero)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(12)) at (prev + 6, 5) to (start + 3, 6)
- Code(Expression(8, Sub)) at (prev + 4, 5) to (start + 3, 6)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
= (c12 - Zero)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(15)) at (prev + 4, 9) to (start + 4, 6)
- Code(Expression(11, Sub)) at (prev + 5, 8) to (start + 0, 15)
Dereference immutable borrows in GVN.
2024-01-05 15:52:58 -06:00
= (c15 - Zero)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(17)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 3, 10)
- Code(Expression(10, Sub)) at (prev + 5, 9) to (start + 3, 10)
Dereference immutable borrows in GVN.
2024-01-05 15:52:58 -06:00
= ((c15 - Zero) - c17)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Expression(15, Add)) at (prev + 5, 8) to (start + 0, 15)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
= ((c17 - Zero) + c18)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(20)) at (prev + 1, 9) to (start + 0, 19)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 3, 13) to (start + 0, 29)
- Code(Expression(14, Sub)) at (prev + 3, 9) to (start + 0, 19)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
= (((c17 - Zero) + c18) - c20)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 3, 13) to (start + 0, 29)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Expression(29, Add)) at (prev + 3, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
= ((c20 - Zero) + c21)
- Code(Expression(29, Add)) at (prev + 1, 12) to (start + 0, 19)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
= ((c20 - Zero) + c21)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(23)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Expression(21, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
coverage: Consistently remove unused counter IDs from expressions/mappings
2023-10-24 06:48:59 -05:00
= (((c20 - Zero) + c21) - c23)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Expression(28, Sub)) at (prev + 4, 5) to (start + 2, 19)
= (((c20 - Zero) + c21) - c24)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(25)) at (prev + 3, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Expression(27, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
= ((((c20 - Zero) + c21) - c24) - c25)
- Code(Expression(46, Add)) at (prev + 3, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
= (c29 + ((c26 - c27) - c30))
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(26)) at (prev + 1, 12) to (start + 0, 19)
- Code(Counter(27)) at (prev + 1, 13) to (start + 3, 14)
- Code(Counter(29)) at (prev + 4, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Expression(48, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 13) to (start + 0, 23)
= (c26 - c27)
- Code(Expression(48, Sub)) at (prev + 1, 20) to (start + 0, 27)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
= (c26 - c27)
Enable by default.
2023-01-18 11:57:50 -06:00
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 1, 21) to (start + 0, 27)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Expression(36, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 21) to (start + 0, 27)
Enable by default.
2023-01-18 11:57:50 -06:00
= ((c26 - c27) - Zero)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Expression(47, Sub)) at (prev + 4, 13) to (start + 0, 19)
= ((c26 - c27) - c30)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Counter(31)) at (prev + 3, 9) to (start + 0, 25)
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.
2024-05-13 22:51:24 -05:00
- Code(Expression(45, Sub)) at (prev + 2, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
= ((c29 + ((c26 - c27) - c30)) - c31)
- Code(Expression(44, Sub)) at (prev + 3, 9) to (start + 0, 34)
= (((c29 + ((c26 - c27) - c30)) - c31) - Zero)
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 06:29:41 -05:00
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 2, 5) to (start + 0, 15)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 3, 9) to (start + 0, 44)
- Code(Zero) at (prev + 2, 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: c31
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 06:29:41 -05:00
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink