vsk added inline comments.
================
Comment at: test/Profile/profile-summary.c:5
@@ +4,3 @@
+// RUN: %clang %s -o - -mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns -emit-llvm -S
-fprofile-instr-use=%t.profdata | FileCheck %s
+//
+int begin(int i) {
----------------
davidxl wrote:
> vsk wrote:
> > ISTM that a lot of the lines in this file do not contribute additional
> > coverage of the changes introduced by your patch.
> >
> > We already have tests which show that the summary code works
> > (`general.proftext`). I think we just need 1 empty function with 1 counter
> > in this file. We don't need to check that the entire detailed summary
> > appears in the metadata, just one cutoff entry should suffice.
> That test is actually not as good for testing summary computation as this
> one. Perhaps we can simplify this test and move this test (removing the clang
> dump part) into llvm-profdata dir.
Makes sense to me.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18289
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
