On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 12:52 PM, Nathan Sidwell wrote:
> On 01/20/12 22:41, Xinliang David Li wrote:
>>
>> Nathan, I just noticed this path. This is a good improvement over the
>> existing scheme.
>>
>> I see one potential problem with the patch -- different instances of
>> the same comdat functi
On 01/20/12 22:41, Xinliang David Li wrote:
Nathan, I just noticed this path. This is a good improvement over the
existing scheme.
I see one potential problem with the patch -- different instances of
the same comdat function can potentially have different control flows
(due to differences in ear
Looks like the change to put fn_info and counter vars into comdat
section is reverted due to regression.
Assuming the comdat changes are kept, I don't see the point of doing
fn data buffering -- it is certainly important to compare the key with
the current gcov_info to avoid merging to happen mult
Nathan, I just noticed this path. This is a good improvement over the
existing scheme.
I see one potential problem with the patch -- different instances of
the same comdat function can potentially have different control flows
(due to differences in early inline, early optimizations in different
mo
