Re: Generate coverage informations in different sections.

On Mon, 2013-06-17 at 17:32 +0200, Jan Hubicka wrote: > > Hi, > > I'm a Xen developer. We have coverage support (lcov replacement) in > > order to extract coverage information. However would be very helpful to > > have a way to put counters, structures and strings (file names) related > > to cove

Generate coverage informations in different sections.

Hi, I'm a Xen developer. We have coverage support (lcov replacement) in order to extract coverage information. However would be very helpful to have a way to put counters, structures and strings (file names) related to coverage in different section. Actually there are no such options (it would be

Re: coverage license information

On Mon, 2013-02-04 at 13:24 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: > On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 12:56 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > > > > Would it make sense to release the header file under a permissive > > license or even public domain? > > > > The information there is just ABI, it's dubious that it is copyrig

coverage license information

Hi, I'd like to add coverage support to Xen. I imported some headers from Linux kernel which mainly came from gcov-io.h and the structures used internally by GCC. Our problem is currently about the license. In gcov-io.h is stated that license is mainly GPL2 which the exception that linking the

Re: Future possible stack based optimization

Il giorno mer, 25/01/2006 alle 22.29 +0100, Marcel Cox ha scritto: > > I saw that stack instructions on Intel platform are not used that > > much. I think this is a pity cause stack operations are small (size > > optimization) and usually fast (from Pentium two consecutive push/pop > > are execut

Future possible stack based optimization

%esp callfoo1 popl%edx popl%ecx ret (note that first pushl allocate and set variable on stack) Is anyone working in this direction? bye Frediano Ziglio

Re: -fpic no optimization...

er functions > (no relocations at all) so why not use ebx register? -fpic make compiler > just not use ebx. I tried using different versions (gcc 3.4.4 from > Fedora Core 3 and 4.0.2 from Fedora Core 4) with same result. > I just tried same test with gcc 4.2.0 20051231 with same behavior. Frediano Ziglio

-fpic no optimization...

functions (no relocations at all) so why not use ebx register? -fpic make compiler just not use ebx. I tried using different versions (gcc 3.4.4 from Fedora Core 3 and 4.0.2 from Fedora Core 4) with same result. Frediano Ziglio (aka freddy77)