[PATCH] Fix target clones (PR gcov-profile/85370).

[Martin Liška]

On 07/25/2018 03:50 PM, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 3:38 PM Martin Liška <mliska@suse.cz> wrote:
>>
>> Hi.
>>
>> Target clones have DECL_ARTIFICIAL set to 1, but we want to
>> provide --coverage for that. With patched GCC on can see:
>>
>>         -:    0:Source:pr85370.c
>>         -:    0:Graph:pr85370.gcno
>>         -:    0:Data:pr85370.gcda
>>         -:    0:Runs:1
>>         -:    0:Programs:1
>>         -:    1:__attribute__((target_clones("arch=slm","default")))
>>         1:    2:int foo1 (int a, int b) { // executed #### wrongly
>>         1:    3:  return a + b;
>>         -:    4:}
>> ------------------
>> foo1.arch_slm.0:
>>         0:    2:int foo1 (int a, int b) { // executed #### wrongly
>>         0:    3:  return a + b;
>>         -:    4:}
>> ------------------
>> foo1.default.1:
>>         1:    2:int foo1 (int a, int b) { // executed #### wrongly
>>         1:    3:  return a + b;
>>         -:    4:}
>> ------------------
>>         -:    5:
>>         1:    6:int foo2 (int a, int b) {
>>         1:    7:  return a + b;
>>         -:    8:}
>>         -:    9:
>>         1:   10:int main() {
>>         1:   11:  foo1(1, 1);
>>         1:   12:  foo2(1, 1);
>>         1:   13:  return 1;
>>         -:   14:}
>>
>> Patch can bootstrap on ppc64le-redhat-linux and survives regression tests.
>> Will install in couple of days if no objection.
> 
> I wonder if representing the clones as artificial but have their body be
> marked as inline instance of the original function works for gcov? 

Do you mean an inlined functions? If so, these are fine as gimple statements
that were inlined still point to original source code.

 I think
> it should for debuggers.  A similar case is probably the
> static_constructors_and_destructors

Actually static_c_a_d were motivation for exclusion. They have location set
to last line in source code and it's not intentional. Similarly implicit
ctors/dtors (e.g. Centering<3>::Centering(Centering<3> const&)) are ignored
as they don't have any real line of code in a source file.

> function which has all ctors/dtors of static objects inlined into but itself is
> of course artificial.  Is that handled correctly?

Hope I explained enough?
Martin

> 
> Richard.
> 
>> Martin
>>
>> gcc/ChangeLog:
>>
>> 2018-07-25  Martin Liska  <mliska@suse.cz>
>>
>>         PR gcov-profile/85370
>>         * coverage.c (coverage_begin_function): Do not mark target
>>         clones as artificial functions.
>> ---
>>  gcc/coverage.c | 3 ++-
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>>