Skip to content
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.

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

Unit testing #13

Closed
ravenrd opened this issue Jul 24, 2014 · 1 comment
Closed

Unit testing #13

ravenrd opened this issue Jul 24, 2014 · 1 comment

Comments

@ravenrd
Copy link
Collaborator

ravenrd commented Jul 24, 2014

We need more elaborate tests to make sure we are not breaking the tool when developing it. The easiest way is probably to run the default transaction trace through the tool for at least one memory if each generation. This verifies that both the transaction scheduler and the power estimation works as intended. This may not cover all possible power down modes, but it is more important to get basic tests up and running before we have perfect ones.

Sv3n added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 28, 2014
Now we should be able to match the output of version 3.1 again.
Sv3n added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 28, 2014
At the moment we have 6 tests:
1) make -j4 should return 0
2) make clean should remove all .o, .a and .d files
3) the output of drampower for the trace in traces/commands.trace should match a reference output file, based on version 3.1.
4) the libdrampower test should build while linking to xerces.
5) the libdrampower test linked with xerces should produces output that matches a reference output file.
6) the libdrampower test should build while not linking to xerces.

Run them by calling 'make test'.
Sv3n added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 28, 2014
Made a global for /dev/null instead of constantly opening and closing a file.
Sv3n added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 4, 2014
Sv3n added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 4, 2014
@ravenrd
Copy link
Collaborator Author

ravenrd commented Sep 9, 2014

We have now added quite some tests and have a code coverage of some 80%. Although you can never have too many tests, I think we can close the issue for now. Keep up the good practice of adding new tests when finding gaps or when developing new functionality.

@ravenrd ravenrd closed this as completed Sep 9, 2014
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant