search for: ashgti

...program, since the flush functions are registered with atexit(). This is the bug report: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12144 I have what I think is a basic implementation of the `__gcov_flush` call, although I called this version `__llvm_gcov_flush`. Here is the diff https://gist.github.com/ashgti/4685743 if anyone would like to see it. So, my question is where should I go from here? Do I need to email the exact patch to llvm-commits? This touches both the llvm and compiler-rt, so I don't know if that changes anything. Thanks, -- John Harrison -------------- next part --------------...

...ince the flush functions are registered with atexit(). This is the bug report: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12144 > > I have what I think is a basic implementation of the `__gcov_flush` call, although I called this version `__llvm_gcov_flush`. Here is the diff https://gist.github.com/ashgti/4685743 if anyone would like to see it. > > So, my question is where should I go from here? Do I need to email the exact patch to llvm-commits? This touches both the llvm and compiler-rt, so I don't know if that changes anything. > > > Thanks, > > -- > John Harriso...

...functions are registered with atexit(). This is the bug > report: http://llvm.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=12144 > > I have what I think is a basic implementation of the `__gcov_flush` call, > although I called this version `__llvm_gcov_flush`. Here is the diff > https://gist.github.com/ashgti/4685743 if anyone would like to see it. > > So, my question is where should I go from here? Do I need to email the > exact patch to llvm-commits? This touches both the llvm and compiler-rt, so > I don't know if that changes anything. > > > Thanks, > > -- > John Har...