-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
coverage_report/report.py considers OTHER bin type in result calculation #24
Comments
What do you mean, you "manually report this bin"? Are you changing the `type="ignore"' to 'type="report"'? |
No. I remove the XML block altogether. |
Literally, delete this entire entry?
|
FWIW, I'm working on this. To simplify things, I took the output of the fir example and cut the second/empty covergroup instance stimulus_coverage_1. Ran the code like so and got the following result as a level set.
Then I modified the xml file further to change the The resulting diff of the xml file looks like this:
Rerunning the code gives:
Which is expected since max is of type ignore and the original code does not obey the directive. I modified fc4sc/ucis_parser.py and report.py. Creating my own versions and reran the code on the modified xml file. The mods are not pretty but the end result is this:
In this case, the value_cvp goes to 100% since the 0 rated coverage for values_cvp:max is ignored. The cross reset_valid which also uses values_cvp also increases. If this is what is intended, I can upload the diff. |
I expect 100% in covergroup and successfully achieve it using
gui/index.html
. When usingcoverage_report/report.py
, I hit < 100%. The culprit is bins with type ignore. When I manually report this bin from xml report and re-run report.py, I hit 100%.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: