mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Library-Aware Doubles and Iterative Repair for Large Language Model-Generated Unit Tests in OpenSIL Firmware

arXiv 2606.19725 ↗First posted 18 Jun 2026cs.SE cs.AI cs.MAcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Validating changes in low-level C firmware is expensive because unit tests (UTs) are fragile under strict build constraints, where missing headers, unresolved symbols, and dependency mismatches frequently prevent compilation and linking. This study introduces an automated UT authoring workflow for the Open-Source Silicon Initialization Library (openSIL) firmware codebase maintained by Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) that reduces manual effort through a large language model (LLM) guided multi-agent pipeline. The workflow combines automated generation of test scaffolds, library-aware creation or reuse of stubs, mocks, and fakes, and an iterative compile-dispatch repair loop driven by build logs and line-coverage feedback. We evaluate the approach using compilation success, repair iterations, dispatch success, and line coverage, with time, cost, and token usage as secondary measures. Across 76 functions under test, the workflow generated compilable UTs for 73 functions. In a configuration without line coverage guidance or retrieval augmentation, mean line coverage reached 73.9%. On a 48-function subset evaluated under both configurations, mean line coverage reached 98.8% with line-coverage guidance alone and reached 94.7% when combined with vector-database retrieval. Results show that automated generation-and-repair pipelines can substantially improve UT creation efficiency and coverage for constrained firmware environments while reducing manual debugging effort.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 11 of its 28 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 18 Jun 2026.

Builds on

11 of 28 references.

References · 11

  1. 2020Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP Taskscited by 9,297
  2. 2023An Empirical Evaluation of Using Large Language Models for Automated Unit Test Generationcited by 194
  3. 2023Software Testing with Large Language Models: Survey, Landscape, and Visioncited by 166
  4. 2018The Art, Science, and Engineering of Fuzzing: A Surveycited by 62
  5. 2023Effective Test Generation Using Pre-trained Large Language Models and Mutation Testingcited by 51
  6. 2024On the Evaluation of Large Language Models in Unit Test Generationcited by 34
  7. 2025CodeRAG: Finding Relevant and Necessary Knowledge for Retrieval-Augmented Repository-Level Code Completioncited by 12
  8. 2024Leveraging Large Language Models for Enhancing the Understandability of Generated Unit Testscited by 11
  9. 2025Large Language Models for Unit Testing: A Systematic Literature Reviewcited by 6
  10. 2024Harnessing the Power of LLMs: Automating Unit Test Generation for High-Performance Computingcited by 3
  11. 2025CITYWALK: Enhancing LLM-Based C++ Unit Test Generation via Project-Dependency Awareness and Language-Specific Knowledgecited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.