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

Fix #791, Add unit test branch coverage #1114

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 22, 2021

Conversation

skliper
Copy link
Contributor

@skliper skliper commented Jul 21, 2021

Describe the contribution
Fix #791 - added branch coverage and minor test updates to use macros (not full update)

Testing performed
Build/run coverage tests and confirm branch coverage (and success)

Full branch coverage except #1107, #1110, #1111:

  lines......: 100.0% (3327 of 3327 lines)
  functions..: 100.0% (361 of 361 functions)
  branches...: 99.8% (1692 of 1696 branches)

Expected behavior changes
None

System(s) tested on

  • Hardware: Intel i5/docker
  • OS: Ubuntu 18.04
  • Versions: Bundle main + this commit

Additional context
None

Third party code
None

Contributor Info - All information REQUIRED for consideration of pull request
Jacob Hageman - NASA/GSFC

@skliper skliper added the CCB:Ready Pull request is ready for discussion at the Configuration Control Board (CCB) label Jul 21, 2021
@skliper skliper force-pushed the fix791-branch-coverage branch from eae8e62 to 002ff71 Compare July 21, 2021 13:17
@astrogeco astrogeco added CCB:Approved Indicates code review and approval by community CCB and removed CCB:Ready Pull request is ready for discussion at the Configuration Control Board (CCB) labels Jul 21, 2021
@astrogeco
Copy link
Contributor

CCB:2021-07-21 APPROVED

@skliper skliper force-pushed the fix791-branch-coverage branch from 164e664 to ecc9c9e Compare July 21, 2021 20:38
@skliper skliper changed the title WIP #791, Add unit test branch coverage Fix #791, Add unit test branch coverage Jul 21, 2021
@skliper skliper requested a review from astrogeco July 21, 2021 20:45
@astrogeco astrogeco changed the base branch from main to integration-candidate July 22, 2021 18:14
@astrogeco astrogeco merged commit 977a769 into nasa:integration-candidate Jul 22, 2021
astrogeco added a commit to nasa/cFS that referenced this pull request Jul 22, 2021
nasa/osal#1114, Add unit test branch coverage
astrogeco added a commit to nasa/cFS that referenced this pull request Jul 29, 2021
Combines:

nasa/cFE#1701, v6.8.0-rc1+dev789
nasa/osal#1116, v5.1.0-rc1+dev578
nasa/cFS-GroundSystem#192, v2.2.0-rc1+dev58

Includes:

**cFE**

nasa/cFE#1699, correct return code check
nasa/cFE#1700, documentation for FS APIs that return OSAL codes
nasa/cFE#1695, Adding coverage tests for cfe_es_apps.c
nasa/cFE#1673, Add File Utility Functional Tests.
nasa/cFE#1711, Add custom epoch support to TIME UT
nasa/cFE#1720, Requirements update for Caelum
nasa/cFE#1721, Add null check to CFE_ES_TaskID_ToIndex.
nasa/cFE#1719, scrub command documentation
nasa/cFE#1715, Add time arithmetic functional tests
nasa/cFE#1704, update docs for CFE_FS_BackgroundFileDumpRequest
nasa/cFE#1706, correct return code mismatches

**osal**

nasa/osal#1114, Add unit test branch coverage

**cFS-GroundSystem**

nasa/cFS-GroundSystem#185, Update tlm for ES Blockstats/memstats and TBL HK
nasa/cFS-GroundSystem#188, * might be referenced before assignment

Co-authored-by: Jacob Hageman <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Joseph Hickey <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Alex Campbell <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jose F Martinez Pedraza <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Niall Mullane <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Paul <[email protected]>
@skliper skliper added this to the 6.0.0 milestone Sep 24, 2021
@skliper skliper deleted the fix791-branch-coverage branch October 22, 2021 19:37
jphickey pushed a commit to jphickey/osal that referenced this pull request Aug 10, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CCB:Approved Indicates code review and approval by community CCB
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Implement 100% branch coverage with return verification
2 participants