This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug gcov-profile/82633] gcov does not handle removed functions
- From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2017 11:48:09 +0000
- Subject: [Bug gcov-profile/82633] gcov does not handle removed functions
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-82633-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=82633
--- Comment #5 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
(In reply to Richard Biener from comment #4)
> (In reply to Martin Liška from comment #3)
> > I don't think so Richi: documentation says:
> >
> > The execution count is ‘-’ for lines containing no code.
>
> "code" or "source code"?
Good question :) Yes, now it reflects to GIMPLE statements.
>
> Because what's the difference to
>
> -: 11: MyClass2 a;
>
> ? I belive implementation-wise any source line that doesn't end up
> having a corresponding assembler stmt with that line will be emitted
> as '-', so DCEd stmts will be listed as '-', not '0'. Does GCC _ever_
> print '0'?
No we never print 0. Actually the lines starting with ##### are the interesting
that are marked by tools as really not executed:
https://gcc.opensuse.org/gcc-lcov/gcc/collect2.c.gcov.html
and subject for another coverage. That's why I would like to see function
'iterate' being marked same as foo.