This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug gcov-profile/45890] Coverage may be weakened by r164986
- From: "rguenther at suse dot de" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2011 09:50:55 +0000
- Subject: [Bug gcov-profile/45890] Coverage may be weakened by r164986
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-45890-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45890
--- Comment #5 from rguenther at suse dot de <rguenther at suse dot de> 2011-10-04 09:50:55 UTC ---
On Tue, 4 Oct 2011, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote:
> http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=45890
>
> --- Comment #4 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at ucw dot cz> 2011-10-04 09:18:56 UTC ---
> > > gcc --coverage -O2 -fno-early-inlining foo.c
> > > ./a.out
> > > gcov -b foo.c
> > >
> > > Adding the following patch mitigates the issue.
> >
> > That's surely not the way to go. Why do you want precise coverage
> > with -O2?
> I guess for performance reasons.
> I would vote for adding coverage pass just after into-SSA.
Where do we do it right now? At profile instrumentation stage, right?
I'd say if we don't need SSA form we should do coverage instrumentation
right after CFG construction, no? Before into-SSA we already have
stuff like OMP lowering. But yes, just after into-SSA would be
an improvement.
Richard.