Hi,
I have been experimenting with the SanitizerCoverage tool and I'm
particularly interested in edge-level coverage. I tried applying this to
some tests I have in a small project and everything makes sense except one
function where a factory is being used. The closing brace is identified as
not covered. I created the following basic example that exhibits similar
behavior:
#include <memory>
#include <vector>
auto usesFactory(int size) -> std::unique_ptr<std::vector<int>> {
auto v = std::make_unique<std::vector<int>>();
v->reserve(size);
return v;
}
int main() {
auto v = usesFactory(5);
return 0;
}
If you compile and run this per the SanitizerCoverage documentation
<http://clang.llvm.org/docs/SanitizerCoverage.html>, you should see that
there are multiple (three in my case) instances of missing coverage on the
line for usesFactory()'s closing brace. I tried two things to figure out
how to eliminate this: -fno-exceptions and adding an additional test where
the mocked factory (taking the place of std::make_unique and reserve)
throws an exception. In my actual test, -fno-exceptions removes all the
missing coverage statements, but throwing an exception through "make_unique
and reserve" doesn't. Using -fno-exceptions in this code example only
removes two out of three missing coverage statements.
Although I'm interested to know how to reach these edges, I've really been
trying to find a way for clang to tell me the control flow graph it's using
when generating the instrumentation. I've tried the debug.DumpCFG static
analysis tool, but that doesn't seem to know anything about exceptions or
any other surprising control flow that would generate these edges.
Additionally, I tried clang++ ... -emit-llvm -S main.cpp -o main.llvm; opt
-dot-cfg main.llvm as well as just looking at assembly after the coverage
instrumentation is added. Unfortunately I haven't been able to make much
sense of these and I don't know if this is the best way forward anyway.
I would really appreciate any help identifying these mysterious edges or,
even better, finding a way to see the CFG that clang is using when
generating the coverage instrumentation code. If the answer is that a new
tool probably needs to be written for that, I'd be happy to take a shot at
it. If the answer is that it's not possible to get such a descriptive
source-level CFG from the coverage tool then I'll be a sad panda.
Thanks,
Brandon
_______________________________________________
cfe-users mailing list
cfe-users@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-users
