This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug gcov-profile/84548] [8 regression] gcov ICE in process_file, at gcov.c:1154
- 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: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 12:52:03 +0000
- Subject: [Bug gcov-profile/84548] [8 regression] gcov ICE in process_file, at gcov.c:1154
- Auto-submitted: auto-generated
- References: <bug-84548-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=84548
--- Comment #14 from Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 43508
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=43508&action=edit
Patch candidate
For reduced test-case:
$ cat test.cc
struct A { static int foo () { return 1; }; static int bar () {
int x;
return 2; } };
int main()
{
return A::foo () + A::bar ();
}
I now have:
$ cat test.cc.gcov
-: 0:Source:test.cc
-: 0:Graph:test.gcno
-: 0:Data:test.gcda
-: 0:Runs:1
-: 0:Programs:1
2: 1:struct A { static int foo () { return 1; }; static int bar () {
-: 2: int x;
1: 3: return 2; } };
------------------
_ZN1A3fooEv:
1: 1:struct A { static int foo () { return 1; }; static int bar () {
------------------
_ZN1A3barEv:
1: 1:struct A { static int foo () { return 1; }; static int bar () {
-: 2: int x;
1: 3: return 2; } };
------------------
-: 4:
1: 5:int main()
-: 6:{
1: 7: return A::foo () + A::bar ();
-: 8:}
Which is correct in my opinion. Can you please Dmitry test the patch?