Open izlatkin opened 2 years ago
Below is the list of benchmarks that have lower coverage for inv-mode 2 then inv-mode 0:
inv-mode 2
inv-mode 0
Benchs: degradation in coverage: deep-nested.c -5,55556% sum_array-1.c -10% trex03-2.c -16%
TG doesn't generate any tests for inv-mode 2: ./loop-invgen/apache-get-tag.i.p+nlh-reducer.c execution time (103.61) < timeout (900) ./loop-invgen/apache-get-tag.i.p+sep-reducer.c execution time == timeout (900) ./loop-invgen/heapsort.c execution time (599) < timeout (900)
./loop-invgen/apache-get-tag.i.p+nlh-reducer.c
./loop-invgen/apache-get-tag.i.p+sep-reducer.c
./loop-invgen/heapsort.c
results location:
scp fmfsu@grigory1.cs.fsu.edu:~/results/inv_mode_0_no_term.zip . scp fmfsu@grigory1.cs.fsu.edu:~/results/inv_mode_2_no_term.zip .
Fixed for sum_array-1.c
sum_array-1.c
Below is the list of benchmarks that have lower coverage for
inv-mode 2
theninv-mode 0
:TG doesn't generate any tests for
inv-mode 2
:./loop-invgen/apache-get-tag.i.p+nlh-reducer.c
execution time (103.61) < timeout (900)./loop-invgen/apache-get-tag.i.p+sep-reducer.c
execution time == timeout (900)./loop-invgen/heapsort.c
execution time (599) < timeout (900)results location: