Integration Testing of Software Product Lines Using Compositional Symbolic Execution

Abstract

Abstract. Software product lines are families of products defined by feature commonality and variability, with a well-managed asset base. Recent work in testing of software product lines has exploited similarities in different development phases to reuse shared assets and reduce test effort. The use of feature dependence graphs has also been employed, and there has been some work that aims to reduce duplication of partial products during integration testing, but less that focuses on code level analysis of dataflow between features. In this paper we present a compositional symbolic execution technique that works in concert with a feature dependence graph to extract the set of possible interaction trees in a product family. It then composes these to incrementally and symbolically analyze feature interactions. We experiment with two product lines and determine that our technique can reduce the overall number of interactions that must be considered during testing, and requires less time to run than a traditional directed symbolic execution technique.

Validation of Constraints Among Configuration Parameters Using Search-Based Combinatorial Interaction Testing

“…There has been much research done in extracting constraints among parameter configurations from real systems (problem space) and modelling system configurability [23,11,25]. For instance, the importance of having a model of variability and having the constraints in the model aligned with the implementation is discussed in [18].…”

Exploring variability-aware execution for testing plugin-based web applications

“…The experiment was carried out on a computer with Intel Core i5 2.30 GHz CPU and 6.00 GB RAM, running Windows 7 64-bit and JVM 7 64-bit with 4.00 GB heap size. We did not even attempt to measure brute-force execution of 2 50 configurations, but can extrapolate a runtime of 35 million years.…”

“…Kim et al and Shi et al have explored static and dynamic analyses to avoid reexecutions of configurations that have exactly the same execution path [36,38,50]. They demonstrated in only one large industrial application and mostly small examples for unit tests with few configuration options.…”

An overview on analysis tools for software product lines

“…Furthermore it collects this statistics for aspects, their pointcuts, advices and inter-type declarations. AJDTStats [28] collect statistics how aspects are used in AspectJ programs, such as shared joint points, Testing Asadal [35], GATE [19], Kesit [73], MATE [54], ParTeG [75], ScenTED-DF [64], SharQ [74], SPLTester [32] shared-execution [34], vai [30], Varex [43] cse [60], splmonitor [33] Type Checking…”

“…Shi et al [60] developed a prototype for compositional symbolic execution (denoted by us as cse) that works in concert with a feature dependence graph to reduce feature interactions that must be tested. SharQ [74] is a framework of projects dealing with hardware and software testing for FOP.…”