[Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/2 v2] cmake: add code coverage support

[Sergey Bronnikov]

Hi, Max

On 8/2/23 11:06, Maxim Kokryashkin via Tarantool-patches wrote:
> Hi, Sergey!
> Thanks for the fixes!
> LGTM, except for a few comments below.
>
> Side note: I see that coverage job in CI is red. Why is that
> happening?

This happened because from time to time total code coverage number 
changes a bit.

It is really annoying, to solve this we need to increase the threshold 
in Coveralls service.



>
> On Tue, Aug 01, 2023 at 09:46:08PM +0300, Sergey Bronnikov via Tarantool-patches wrote:
>> From: Sergey Bronnikov <sergeyb at tarantool.org>
>>
>> The patch adds building code coverage report using gcovr [1] and gcov.
>> gcovr is a better version of lcov, see [2]. There were two new CMake
>> targets added: LuaJIT-coverage proccess *.gcno and *.gcda files with
> Typo: s/process/processes/
Fixed.
>> gcov, builds a detailed HTML report and prints a summary, target
>> coverage executes LuaJIT-tests and then runs LuaJIT-coverage. Target
>> LuaJIT-coverage is useful for building code coverage report for a custom
>> set of regression tests.
>>
>> ```
>> $ cmake -S . -B build -DENABLE_COVERAGE=ON
>> $ cmake --build build --parallel --target coverage
>>
>> <snipped>
>>
>> lines: 84.1% (26056 out of 30997)
>> functions: 88.8% (2055 out of 2314)
>> branches: 71.5% (14801 out of 20703)
>> ```
>>
>> 1. https://gcovr.com/
>> 2. https://gcovr.com/en/stable/faq.html#what-is-the-difference-between-lcov-and-gcovr
>> ---
>>   CMakeLists.txt                        |  9 ++++++
>>   cmake/CodeCoverage.cmake              | 45 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   test/CMakeLists.txt                   |  7 +++++
>>   test/tarantool-c-tests/CMakeLists.txt |  6 +++-
>>   4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>   create mode 100644 cmake/CodeCoverage.cmake
>>
>> diff --git a/CMakeLists.txt b/CMakeLists.txt
>> index 6ef24bba..fe6582fa 100644
>> --- a/CMakeLists.txt
>> +++ b/CMakeLists.txt
>> @@ -116,6 +116,15 @@ if(LUAJIT_ENABLE_WARNINGS)
>>     )
>>   endif()
>>   
>> +set(LUAJIT_ENABLE_COVERAGE_DEFAULT OFF)
>> +option(LUAJIT_ENABLE_COVERAGE
>> +       "Enable integration with gcovr, a code coverage program"
>> +       ${LUAJIT_ENABLE_COVERAGE_DEFAULT})
>> +if (LUAJIT_ENABLE_COVERAGE)
>> +  AppendFlags(CMAKE_C_FLAGS --coverage)
>> +  include(CodeCoverage)
>> +endif(LUAJIT_ENABLE_COVERAGE)
>> +
>>   # Auxiliary flags for main targets (libraries, binaries).
>>   AppendFlags(TARGET_C_FLAGS
>>     -D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64
>> diff --git a/cmake/CodeCoverage.cmake b/cmake/CodeCoverage.cmake
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 00000000..2be7d129
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/cmake/CodeCoverage.cmake
>> @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
>> +find_program(GCOVR gcovr)
>> +find_program(GCOV gcov)
>> +
>> +set(COVERAGE_DIR "${PROJECT_BINARY_DIR}/coverage")
>> +set(COVERAGE_HTML_REPORT "${COVERAGE_DIR}/luajit.html")
>> +set(COVERAGE_XML_REPORT "${COVERAGE_DIR}/luajit.xml")
>> +
>> +if(NOT GCOVR OR NOT GCOV)
>> +  add_custom_target(${PROJECT_NAME}-coverage
>> +    COMMAND ${CMAKE_COMMAND} -E cmake_echo_color --red "LuaJIT-coverage is a dummy target"
>> +  )
>> +  message(WARNING "Either `gcovr' or `gcov` not found, \
>> +so ${PROJECT_NAME}-coverage target is dummy")
> Nit: Something is wrong with alignment here.
No, it is intentionally. If you add indentation then these whitespaces 
will be added to a message.
<snipped>
>>