Skip to content

Improve coverage test naming #32443

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 16, 2020
Merged

Improve coverage test naming #32443

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
21 changes: 10 additions & 11 deletions test/Profiler/coverage_relative_path.swift
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,16 +1,15 @@
// %s expands to an absolute path, so to test relative paths we need to create a
// clean directory, put the source there, and cd into it.
// To make sure this test is resilient to directory changes, we create nested directories inside of the
// temporary test directory and assert those exist, or don't exist, in the emitted ir
//
// RUN: rm -rf %t
// RUN: mkdir -p %t/foo/bar/baz
// RUN: echo "func coverage() {}" > %t/foo/bar/baz/coverage_relative_path.swift
// RUN: cd %t/foo/bar
// RUN: mkdir -p %t/root/nested
// RUN: echo "func coverage() {}" > %t/root/nested/coverage_relative_path.swift
// RUN: cd %t/root
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Really we only needed 2 levels of nesting to validate we had the absolute path in the output in the first case


// RUN: %target-swift-frontend -profile-generate -profile-coverage-mapping -Xllvm -enable-name-compression=false -emit-ir %/t/foo/bar/baz/coverage_relative_path.swift | %FileCheck -check-prefix=ABSOLUTE %s
// RUN: %target-swift-frontend -profile-generate -profile-coverage-mapping -Xllvm -enable-name-compression=false -emit-ir nested/coverage_relative_path.swift | %FileCheck -check-prefix=ABSOLUTE %s
//
// ABSOLUTE: @__llvm_coverage_mapping = {{.*"\\01.*foo.*bar.*baz.*coverage_relative_path\.swift}}
// ABSOLUTE: @__llvm_coverage_mapping = {{.*"\\01.*root.*nested.*coverage_relative_path\.swift}}
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since this doesn't check for / vs \ in paths, we don't need to force the command line to only contain /

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does it matter how the path is encoded? I suspect not, but, since I don't know definitively, I'll ask.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not as far as I know but I won't claim to be an expert here


// RUN: %target-swift-frontend -profile-generate -profile-coverage-mapping -Xllvm -enable-name-compression=false -coverage-prefix-map %/t/foo/bar=. -emit-ir %/t/foo/bar/baz/coverage_relative_path.swift | %FileCheck -check-prefix=RELATIVE %s
// RUN: %target-swift-frontend -profile-generate -profile-coverage-mapping -Xllvm -enable-name-compression=false -coverage-prefix-map %/t/root=. -emit-ir %/t/root/nested/coverage_relative_path.swift | %FileCheck -check-prefix=RELATIVE %s
//
// RELATIVE: @__llvm_coverage_mapping = {{.*"\\01[^/]*}}.{{/|\\}}baz{{.*coverage_relative_path\.swift}}

func coverage() {}
// RELATIVE: @__llvm_coverage_mapping = {{.*"\\01[^/]*}}.{{/|\\}}nested{{.*coverage_relative_path\.swift}}