One activity performed by developers during regression testing is test-suite augmentation, which consists of assessing the adequacy of a test suite after a program is modified and identifying new or modified behaviors that are not adequately exercised by the existing test suite and, thus, require additional test cases. In previous work, we proposed MATRIX, a technique for test-suite augmentation based on dependence analysis and partial symbolic execution. In this paper, we present the next step of our work, where we (I) improve the effectiveness of our technique by identifying all relevant change-propagation paths, (2) extend the technique to handle multiple and more complex changes, (3) introduce the first tool that fully implements the technique, and (4) present an empirical evaluation performed on real software. Our results show that our technique is practical and more effective than existing test-suite augmentation approaches in identifying test cases with high fault-detection capabilities.

As software evolves, impact analysis estimates the potential effects of changes, before or after they are made, by identifying which parts of the software may be affected by such changes. Traditional impact-analysis techniques are based on static analysis and, due to their conservative assumptions, tend to identify most of the software as affected by the changes. More recently, researchers have begun to investigate dynamic impact-analysis techniques, which rely on dynamic, rather than static, information about software behavior. Existing dynamic impact-analysis techniques are either very expensive---in terms of execution overhead or amount of dynamic information collected---or imprecise. In this paper, we present a new technique for dynamic impact analysis that is almost as efficient as the most efficient existing technique and is as precise as the most precise existing technique. The technique is based on a novel algorithm that collects (and analyzes) only the essential dynamic information required for the analysis. We discuss our technique, prove its correctness, and present a set of empirical studies in which we compare our new technique with two existing techniques, in terms of performance and precision.

Impact analysis - determining the potential effects of changes on a software system - plays an important role in software engineering tasks such as maintenance, regression testing, and debugging. In previous work, two new dynamic impact analysis techniques, CoverageImpact and PathImpact, were presented. These techniques perform impact analysis based on data gathered about program behavior relative to specific inputs, such as inputs gathered from field data, operational profile data, or test-suite executions. Due to various characteristics of the algorithms they employ, CoverageImpact and PathImpact are expected to differ in terms of cost and precision; however, there have been no studies to date examining the extent to which such differences may emerge in practice. Since cost-precision tradeoffs may play an important role in technique selection and further research, we wished to examine these tradeoffs. We therefore designed and performed an empirical study, comparing the execution and space costs of the techniques, as well as the precisions of the impact analysis results that they report. This paper presents the results of this study.

Software products are often released with missing functionality, errors, or incompatibilities that may result in failures, inferior performances, or user dissatisfaction. In previous work, we presented the Gamma approach, which facilitates remote analysis and measurement of deployed software and permits gathering of program-execution data from the field. In this paper, we investigate the use of the Gamma approach to support and improve two fundamental tasks performed by software engineers during maintenance: impact analysis and regression testing. We present a new approach that leverages field data to perform these two tasks. The approach is efficient in that the kind of field data that we consider require limited space and little instrumentation. We also present a set of empirical studies that we performed, on a real subject and on a real user population, to evaluate the approach. The results of the studies show that the use of field data is effective and, for the cases considered, can considerably affect the results of dynamic analyses.

Recording dynamic information for only a subset of program entities can reduce monitoring overhead and can facilitate efficient monitoring of deployed software. Program entities, such as statements, can be monitored using probes that track the execution of those entities. Monitoring more complicated entities, such as paths or definition-use associations, requires more sophisticated techniques that track not only the execution of the desired entities but also the execution of other entities with which they interact. This paper presents an approach for monitoring subsets of one such program entity---acyclic paths in procedures. Our selective path profiling algorithm computes values for probes that guarantee that the sum of the assigned value along each acyclic path (path sum) in the subset is unique; acyclic paths not in the subset may or may not have unique path sums. The paper also presents the results of studies that compare the number of probes required for subsets of various sizes with the number of probes required for profiling all paths, computed using Ball and Larus' path profiling algorithm. Our results indicate that the algorithm performs well on many procedures by requiring only a small percentage of probes for monitoring the subset.