This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Patch for "no_instrument_function" attribute

Will Cohen <> writes:

> Andreas Jaeger wrote:
>> Will Cohen <> writes:
>> > The attribute "no_instrument_function" allows the support routines for
>> > "-finstrument-functions" to be compiled with the same set of options
>> > as other functions.  The operation of this attribute has been extended
>> > to apply to "-p" and "-pg" options. This will make it much easier to
>> > compile multilibs such as newlib and have the profiling support within
>> > the
>> > library. The profiling support functions should be compiled without
>> > profiling. With this extension to the "no_instrument_function"
>> > attribute the profiling support routines in the library will be
>> > compiled correctly regardless of whether a profiling option is passed
>> > to the compiler. Is it okay to apply this patch?
>> Did you test it?  Please tell us how and where.
> Yes, I did test it. The patched FSF gcc compiler bootstraps without
> problem. This was on an RH 7.2 machine generating a native
> i686-pc-linux-gnu compiler. I performed a "make compare"; that didn't
> turn up any problems.  I also verified that the change disables the

According to the build instructions on section "Bootstrapping and testing"
this is not enough.  You need to do a full bootstrap and regression

> profiling on a per function basis with a small test file.

Good.  Do you have a test case for this?

 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]