https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1757804
M. Scherer <msche...@redhat.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |msche...@redhat.com --- Comment #1 from M. Scherer <msche...@redhat.com> --- I would have blamed gcc optimisation, but that's unlikely (despites -O0 doing some minor optimisation, I didn't found anything that could result into that). There is also curious output, such as line 76 called 1 time more than line 77, and less than line 73, despites all of them supposed to be in the same clause. Line 52 of the same file is the same: list_for_each_entry_safe is called 585195 time, while the function is called 583093. The same goes in the others file, like https://build.gluster.org/job/line-coverage/Line_20Coverage_20Report/libglusterfs/src/common-utils.c.gcov.html line 92 ( "hash = XXH64(data, len, seed);") vs 93 ( "XXH64_canonicalFromHash(&c_hash, hash);" ). So it could be normal, or it could be a bug. I am gonna take a quick look at the assembly generated out of curiosity, and I did ask to a few compiler folks on irc, but if this doesn't yield anything, I will just close the bug, unless I am missing something. The goal of coverage is to see what is tested from what is not, so even with such errors, it should be good enough for that. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Gluster-infra mailing list Gluster-infra@gluster.org https://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-infra