> From: Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> > Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 9:07 AM > > On 6/20/19 3:00 PM, david.tay...@dell.com wrote: > > > >> From: Martin Liška <mli...@suse.cz> > >> Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2019 5:12 AM > >> > >> On 6/19/19 7:11 PM, david.tay...@dell.com wrote: > >>> Thanks for the patch. Standalone it is not sufficient. Combined > >>> with the other two changes that have been discussed -- > >> > >> Why is that not sufficient? If you build from top-level and you have > >> .o files that overwrite each other, then you can set > >> -fprofile-note-dir=/tmp/my- unique-folder > >> > >> And you'll not overwrite .gcno files. > >> > >> Martin > > > > Right now GCC names the GCNO files '-.gcno'. > > > > With your patch they get put into a specified directory. But, unless > > I am prepared to create over 16,000 directories each to hold just one > > file (I'm not), it is not sufficient. > > > > What I want to do -- unless it is going to create problems -- is to > > place the notes files alongside the object files. The files foo.o and > > foo.gcno would be in the same directory.
> I would recommend that. You can achieve that with -fprofile-note-dir=. But unless some other change is also made, the '-o -' part of our compilation line results in all the notes files having names of '-.gcno'. While I have considered replacing the '-o -' with '-pipe' when doing instrumentation, I am loathe to make the dot c to dot o rule any more complicated -- it is already 30+ lines long. Your patch makes things much better. And for many it would be sufficient. For us, sadly, it is not enough.
