> Is this patch ok for trunk?
Hi,
the patch is OK.
Sorry for delayed reply, I was very busy by the inliner/thunk bits and this code
is not really in my area of expertise, so it needed some consideration to make
sense
of it.
Honza
>
> Allowing relative path in -fprofile-generate= is very useful w
Honza, what do you think of the patch? It actually fixed a regression.
Thanks,
David
On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 4:40 PM, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> Is this patch ok for trunk?
>
> Allowing relative path in -fprofile-generate= is very useful when
> running the program remotely -- the profile data wi
Is this patch ok for trunk?
Allowing relative path in -fprofile-generate= is very useful when
running the program remotely -- the profile data will be just dumped
in the dir relative to the working dir in the remote machine. Using
GCOV_PREFIX_STRIP can workaround the problem, but it is not always
On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 10:48 AM, Martin Thuresson wrote:
> This is slightly updated from my previous patch proposal. The test now
> correctly work if multiple tests are executed in parallell.
Forgot to mention that this patch has been bootstrapped without
regression on x86_64 and should be consi
This is slightly updated from my previous patch proposal. The test now
correctly work if multiple tests are executed in parallell.
2011-04-17 Martin Thuresson
* gcc/doc/invoke.tex: Document support for relative profile paths.
* gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr47793.c: New test.
On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 11:53 AM, Diego Novillo wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 17:07, Martin Thuresson wrote:
>> Ping.
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Martin Thuresson wrote:
>>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Martin Thuresson
>>> wrote:
Change 165596 and 168475 updated the code
On Tue, Mar 1, 2011 at 17:07, Martin Thuresson wrote:
> Ping.
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 3:37 PM, Martin Thuresson wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Martin Thuresson
>> wrote:
>>> Change 165596 and 168475 updated the code for handling gcda-paths. As
>>> part of this change, relative
