On 1/7/2022 4:03 pm, Sebastian Huber wrote: > On 01.07.22 07:38, Chris Johns wrote: >>>> If this enable is specific to GCC's gcov then maybe we should clearly >>>> label it >>>> as that and avoid overloading the term and any possible confusion that >>>> might >>>> bring. For example RTEMS_GCOV_CONVERGE? >>> It is not per se specific to GCC. Maybe we should name it >>> RTEMS_COVERAGE_INSTRUMENTATION. >> What if another approach to instrumented coverage is developed? >> >> Why the reluctance to RTEMS_GCOV_COVERAGE? I like it because it is direct. > > Ok, I rename it to RTEMS_GCOV_COVERAGE.
Thanks. >>>>> The user can fine tune the build through the >>>>> LIBRARY_OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS, TEST_OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS, and >>>>> COVERAGE_COMPILER_FLAGS, >>>>> COVERAGE_LINKER_FLAGS options. >>>> How would the LTO fat options be added? Would the pattern for >>>> COVERAGE_COMPILER_FLAGS flags be copied to add LTO_COMPILER_FLAGS? >>> Do you have to specify the compiler flags also during linking if you use >>> LTO? >> You add `-flto -ffat-lto-objects` to build the object files so they then >> contain >> the data the lto pass in the linker needs to optimise across the object >> files. > > The COVERAGE_LINKER_FLAGS are for the linking step. Are you required to pass > the > compiler flags during linking if you use LTO? Good question, I do not know. I think you can tall the linker to use LTO and to not use LTO. I do not know what the default mode of the linker is when presented with LTO enabled object files? The app I am building sets these flags in the cflags and those are passed to the linker. >> I am encouraged by some of the generated code I have reviewed. I like what it >> does. >> >>>> I am a little lost with the difference between LIBRARY_OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS >>>> and >>>> OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS? RTEMS is always a library so what is difference between >>>> them? Are the OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS the "-O" ones and still something I can >>>> set >>>> from an INI file? >>> Currently the OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS are used for all code (code for libraries >>> and >>> code for tests). With this change you can build the libraries with -O0 and >>> the >>> tests with -O2 for example. >> Oh so if I understand this the LIBRARY_OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS are per library? > > Not per library, the LIBRARY_OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS are used for all libraries in > bsps and cpukit. Is LIBRARY_OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS then a good choice? Would more direct naming like BSP_OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS and CPUKIT_OPTIMIZATION_FLAGS be better? If this was in the patch I would have understood exactly what they do. Chris _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@rtems.org http://lists.rtems.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
