================ Comment at: test/CoverageMapping/break.c:3 @@ +2,3 @@ +// RUN: %clang %s -fprofile-instr-generate -fcoverage-mapping -O2 -o %t/test +// RUN: (cd %t; %t/test) +// RUN: llvm-profdata merge %t/default.profraw -o %t/pgodata ---------------- Reid Kleckner wrote: > Alex Lorenz wrote: > > Reid Kleckner wrote: > > > I don't think we allow execution tests in Clang's internal test suite. > > > Can this live in test-suite? > > I can take out the execution part then, so it will look something like this: > > > > // RUN: %clang %s -fprofile-instr-generate -fcoverage-mapping -O2 -o %stest > > // RUN: llvm-cov dump %stest| FileCheck %s > Even this test would rely on having a system linker that can link a binary > for LLVM_DEFAULT_TARGET_TRIPLE, which might not be a native architecture. Can > llvm-cov -dump run on an object file? Is that a useful test? > > This kind of large execution test for coverage seems valuable, but I don't > think we can reasonably expect it to pass in every supported configuration. > It seems to me like it's a better fit for test-suite. We can definitely keep > the IRGen tests, though. I see your point. In that case I can just compile and create an object file, and llvm-cov should be able to dump the info from it as long as LLVM's object file API's support the object file format. This would be a useful test indeed, as I'm looking at the mapping regions produced by clang and the execution counts don't matter.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D4793 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
