search for: content_shell

...t?rev=194701&view=rev http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=194702&view=rev It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just "visited or not"), but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the overhead is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. Maybe we want to implement something simple like this in the Clang coverage. --kcc -------------- next part -------------- An HTML att...

...> http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=194702&view=rev > It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just > "visited or not"), > but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) > I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the > overhead > is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. > > We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. > Maybe we want to implement something simple like this in the Clang coverage. > > --kcc > >

...m-project?rev=194702&view=rev >>> It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just >>> "visited or not"), >>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the >>> overhead >>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >>> >>> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. >>> Maybe we want to implement something simple like this in the Clang cov...

...w=rev > http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=194702&view=rev > It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just "visited or not"), > but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) > I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the overhead > is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. > > We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. > Maybe we want to implement something simple like this in the Clang coverage. > > --kcc -------------- nex...

...v >>>>> It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just >>>>> "visited or not"), >>>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >>>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the >>>>> overhead >>>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >>>>> >>>>> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. >>>>> Maybe we want to implement som...

...m.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=194702&view=rev >> It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just >> "visited or not"), >> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the >> overhead >> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >> >> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. >> Maybe we want to implement something simple like this in the Clang coverage. >> >&...

...t provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just >>>>>>> "visited or not"), >>>>>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >>>>>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the >>>>>>> overhead >>>>>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. >>>>&gt...

...4702&view=rev >>>> It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just >>>> "visited or not"), >>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the >>>> overhead >>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >>>> >>>> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. >>>> Maybe we want to implement something simple like th...

...w=rev > http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=194702&view=rev > It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just "visited or not"), > but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) > I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the overhead > is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. > > We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. > Maybe we want to implement something simple like this in the Clang coverage. > > --kcc > ------------...

...t;>> It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just >>>>>> "visited or not"), >>>>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >>>>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the >>>>>> overhead >>>>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >>>>>> >>>>>> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. >>>>>> Maybe we wa...

...-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just >>>>>>>>> "visited or not"), >>>>>>>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >>>>>>>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the >>>>>>>>> overhead >>>>>>>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting...

...nly function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just >>>>>>>> "visited or not"), >>>>>>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >>>>>>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the >>>>>>>> overhead >>>>>>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. >...

...nters, just >> >>>>>>>>> "visited or not"), >> >>>>>>>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the >> binary file, etc) >> >>>>>>>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy >> binary) and the >> >>>>>>>>> overhead >> >>>>>>>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> We'll be ev...

...i.e. no > counters, just > >>>>>>>>> "visited or not"), > >>>>>>>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the > binary file, etc) > >>>>>>>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) > and the > >>>>>>>>> overhead > >>>>>>>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> We'll be evaluating this implem...

...ttp://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?rev=194702&view=rev >> It provides only function-level boolean coverage (i.e. no counters, just "visited or not"), >> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) >> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the overhead >> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. >> >> We'll be evaluating this implementation and collecting usage stats. >> Maybe we want to implement something simple like this in the Clang coverage. >> >> --...

...coverage (i.e. no counters, just > >>>>>>>>> "visited or not"), > >>>>>>>>> but is very fast and very simple (no extra sections to the binary file, etc) > >>>>>>>>> I've tried it for Chrome's content_shell (huge and heavy binary) and the > >>>>>>>>> overhead > >>>>>>>>> is negligible at both run-time and shutdown-time. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> We'll be evaluating this implementat...