On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 9:06 PM, Diego Novillo <dnovi...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 14:49, Lawrence Crowl <cr...@google.com> wrote: >> This patch provides more finer, more precise compile time information. >> I sent an advisory mail some time ago, and it was good then. Please >> confirm for trunk. > > The patch looks fine to me, but of course it's Jason the one you need > an OK from.
Pushing/popping timevars is not free. What's the compile-time impact of this change (for -ftime-report, of course) - with small timed regions, does it not just return garbage because of clock precision issues and overhead of querying the clock iself? Richard.
