On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> >> - else if (entry->checksum != checksum)
>> >> + else if (entry->lineno_checksum != lineno_checksum
>> >> + || entry->cfg_checksum != cfg_checksum)
>> >> {
>> >> error ("coverage mismatch for
> >> - else if (entry->checksum != checksum)
> >> + else if (entry->lineno_checksum != lineno_checksum
> >> + || entry->cfg_checksum != cfg_checksum)
> >> {
> >> error ("coverage mismatch for function %u while reading
> >> execution counters",
> >>
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 8:54 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> Please don't forget about changelogs..
>> Index: tree.c
>> ===
>> --- tree.c (revision 172802)
>> +++ tree.c (working copy)
>> @@ -8513,14 +8513,12 @@ dump_tree_statistics (v
Please don't forget about changelogs..
> Index: tree.c
> ===
> --- tree.c(revision 172802)
> +++ tree.c(working copy)
> @@ -8513,14 +8513,12 @@ dump_tree_statistics (void)
The crc bits was already reviewed, right?
> - el
Honza, any more comments?
Thanks,
David
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 9:35 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Is the patch ok?
>
> Thanks,
>
> David
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>>> Please review the new patch which only implements cfg checksum.
>>>
>>> The auto version gener
Is the patch ok?
Thanks,
David
On Fri, Apr 22, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> Please review the new patch which only implements cfg checksum.
>>
>> The auto version generation was introduced in 2002 before FDO support
>> was added (so the old way never existed), so it might be better t
> Please review the new patch which only implements cfg checksum.
>
> The auto version generation was introduced in 2002 before FDO support
> was added (so the old way never existed), so it might be better to
> make the change independent of this one.
FDO support was there well before 2002, just
Please review the new patch which only implements cfg checksum.
The auto version generation was introduced in 2002 before FDO support
was added (so the old way never existed), so it might be better to
make the change independent of this one.
Thanks,
David
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 2:15 PM, Xinlia
On Thu, Apr 21, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> > I don't really follow the logic here. buffer is allocated to be size of
>> > block+4 and it is expected that gcov_write_words is not executed on size
>> > greater than 4. Since gcov_write_string now seems to be expected to handle
>> > stri
> > I don't really follow the logic here. buffer is allocated to be size of
> > block+4 and it is expected that gcov_write_words is not executed on size
> > greater than 4. Since gcov_write_string now seems to be expected to handle
> > strings of bigger size, I think you acually need to make writ
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 15:47, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> The attached is the revised patch with a warning suggested for cases
> when CFG matches, but source locations change.
>
> Ok for trunk?
The tree.c changes are OK.
Diego.
On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 3:20 PM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> I can not review tree.c changes. I would probably suggest making crc_byte
> inline.
Diego, can you review this change? This is just a simple refactoring.
>
>> +#if IN_LIBGCOV
>> +
>> +/* These functions are guarded by #if to avoid compile
I can not review tree.c changes. I would probably suggest making crc_byte
inline.
> +#if IN_LIBGCOV
> +
> +/* These functions are guarded by #if to avoid compile time warning. */
> +
> +/* Return the number of words STRING would need including the length
> + field in the output stream itself.
The attached is the revised patch with a warning suggested for cases
when CFG matches, but source locations change.
Ok for trunk?
thanks,
David
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> Hi, in current FDO implementation, the source file version used in
>> profile-generate needs t
On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 8:36 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>> Hi, in current FDO implementation, the source file version used in
>> profile-generate needs to strictly match the version used in
>> profile-use -- simple formating changes will invalidate the profile
>> data (use of it will lead to compiler
> Hi, in current FDO implementation, the source file version used in
> profile-generate needs to strictly match the version used in
> profile-use -- simple formating changes will invalidate the profile
> data (use of it will lead to compiler error or ICE). There are two
> main problems that lead t
Resent in plain text mode ..
David
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 9:28 AM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>
> Honza, do you have a chance to take a look at it?
> Thanks,
>
> David
>
> On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>>
>> Hi, in current FDO implementation, the source file version
This was contributed by:
2011-04-13 Neil Vachharajani
On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 3:25 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Hi, in current FDO implementation, the source file version used in
> profile-generate needs to strictly match the version used in
> profile-use -- simple formating changes will i
Hi, in current FDO implementation, the source file version used in
profile-generate needs to strictly match the version used in
profile-use -- simple formating changes will invalidate the profile
data (use of it will lead to compiler error or ICE). There are two
main problems that lead to the weak
19 matches
Mail list logo
