search for: gcov

...put/llvm-cov.test.tmp cd /home/rkotler/caviumllvm/build/test/tools/llvm-cov/Output/llvm-cov.test.tmp cp /home/rkotler/workspace/llvm/test/tools/llvm-cov/Inputs/test* . /home/rkotler/caviumllvm/build/Debug+Asserts/bin/llvm-cov test.c | diff -u test_no_options.output - diff -aub test_no_options.cpp.gcov test.cpp.gcov diff -aub test_no_options.h.gcov test.h.gcov mkdir -p /home/rkotler/caviumllvm/build/test/tools/llvm-cov/Output/llvm-cov.test.tmp/objdir cp test.gcno test.gcda /home/rkotler/caviumllvm/build/test/tools/llvm-cov/Output/llvm-cov.test.tmp/objdir /home/rkotler/caviumllvm/build/Debug+Ass...

All, Here are the latest patches to expreiment with gcov profiler for xen hypervisor. I have tested current patches on Intel i686. System Details: gcc version 4.3.3 (Ubuntu 4.3.3-5ubuntu4) gcov (Ubuntu 4.3.3-5ubuntu4) 4.3.3 Kernel 2.6.28-11-generic Distribution: Ubuntu jaunty 9.04 There are some design issue which i would like to highlight here: 1. To c...

All, Here are the latest patches to expreiment with gcov profiler for xen hypervisor. I have tested current patches on Intel i686. System Details: gcc version 4.3.3 (Ubuntu 4.3.3-5ubuntu4) gcov (Ubuntu 4.3.3-5ubuntu4) 4.3.3 Kernel 2.6.28-11-generic Distribution: Ubuntu jaunty 9.04 There are some design issue which i would like to highlight here: 1. To c...

Updated set of patches for coverage. Changes: - change copyright lines - use gcov: instead of cover: in commit comment - use #ifdef in xen/common/sysctl.c instead of dummy inline function - added base documentation in docs/misc - added -h option to xencov

Hello, The following patch series enables LLVM coverage support for the Xen hypervisor. This first patches are a re-organization of the gcov support, in order to make the support generic for all coverage technologies. This is mostly a name change from gcov -> cov in several places and files, together with the addition of a Kconfig option in order to enable LLVM coverage. Patch 7 introduces the actual LLVM coverage support code that...

Hi Justin , Thank you for the confirmation and we would like to know that ,going forward the clang has the support the gcc gcov format or use the -fprofile-instr-generate -fcoverage-mapping and get ride of gcov format . We are planing to customize the clang code coverage for embedded world ,before we start tweaking the gcov / -fprofile-instr-generate code-base ,we would like to take feedback from the group . Did -fprofil...

Umesh Kalappa <umesh.kalappa0 at gmail.com> writes: > Hi Justin , > > Thank you for the confirmation and we would like to know that ,going > forward the clang has the support the gcc gcov format or use the > -fprofile-instr-generate -fcoverage-mapping and get ride of gcov > format . Going forward, the -fprofile-instr-generate -fcoverage-mapping (which I'll refer to as instrprof) work will continue to be improved and built upon. The gcov support in llvm isn't going aw...

Hi, Alan Thanks for making it clear. But I was more confused now :( I tested on a simple program and used both gcov and lcov to get branch coverage. The code and build commands as below: *Example simple.cc* #include <string> // If not comment this line, the branch coverage won't reach to 100% // #include <iostream> int main(int argc, const char* argv[]) { std::string str = "foo";...

...ld be included as part of llvm-cov effort. >> Also, do you have some documentation about the llvm-cov (how it works, what is the performance, etc)? > > Our recent work on llvm-cov has been pretty limited in scope. We’ve gotten it to work as a drop-in replacement for the old version of gcov that we had from gcc-4.2. There are still a few minor differences, but it generally seems to be working well. > > As we discussed at the dev meeting, I want to hook up our PGO instrumentation to be used for coverage as well, but so far, our focus has been on the PGO side and there is nothing...

...ctionality could be included as part of llvm-cov effort. > Also, do you have some documentation about the llvm-cov (how it works, what is the performance, etc)? Our recent work on llvm-cov has been pretty limited in scope. We’ve gotten it to work as a drop-in replacement for the old version of gcov that we had from gcc-4.2. There are still a few minor differences, but it generally seems to be working well. As we discussed at the dev meeting, I want to hook up our PGO instrumentation to be used for coverage as well, but so far, our focus has been on the PGO side and there is nothing implement...

Hi Everyone, I have uploaded a patch that allows one to successfully gather gcov/gcda coverage information on programs which unload shared libraries. It¹s a simple fix, just adding a few COMPILER_RT_VISIBILITY (i.e. __attribute__((visibility("hidden")))) in GCDAProfiling.c. Now, I¹d like to include a test program to demonstrate the fix. AFAICT, there seems to be a si...

Hi, Alan Really very excited to receive your email and sorry to be slow replying, it has been exceptionally busy over the last few days ;( Your explanation made the problem clear to me. So gcov branch coverage should be called condition coverage and clang region coverage is branch coverage in fact(also known as *decision/C1*), right? And llvm/clang will support all the following coverage criteria in future - Line coverage - Function coverage - Branch coverage/region coverage...

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Reid Kleckner <reid.kleckner at gmail.com> wrote: > An easier way would be to use a coverage tool like gcov to see what's > actually *used* when the app is run normally.  Then you can ask the > question, what percentage of all lines of code are dead? We need something that can do this using static analysis... Otherwise we can just use Eclipse and search for reference as a first approximation a...

Hi, viewing the gcov coverage report (accessible via llvm.org -> Coverage in the left bar) yields a 403 access forbidden for most folders. For instance: http://llvm.org/reports/coverage/tools/clang/lib/Parse/index.html Coverage from llvm-cov is still available at http://lab.llvm.org:8080/coverage/coverage-reports/...

Hi, llvm/clang experts I need to get the branch coverage for some testing code. But i found gcov can't give a expected coverage which may count some 'hidden branch' in (See stackoverflow answer <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/42003783/lcov-gcov-branch-coverage-with-c-producing-branches-all-over-the-place>). Instead, I turn to use clang and the 'source-based code cove...

...adra/bcov > > [2]: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2004.14191.pdf > > [3]: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/174675.175935 > > [4]: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/2931037.2931047 > > Hi Ammar, > > Great work! > > I think the following statement in the paper is not true: "gcov relies on > debug > information which is less accurate in optimized builds." GCC's gcov > implementation does not rely on debugging information. This can be > verified with > -fdump-debug: `gcc --coverage -fdump-debug -c a.c` dumps an empty > a.c.*.debug > file. > &...

Hi All, We trying to use clang+llvm to generate the gcc coverage format as clang version 3.6.0 $clang --coverage -Xclang -coverage-cfg-checksum -Xclang -coverage-no-function-names-in-data -Xclang -coverage-version='407*' test.c $a.out $llvm-cov gcov test.gcda Unexpected version: *704. Invalid .gcno File! Debugging the above cause ,But any hints from experts here ,will help a lot . Appreciate your time ,Thank you ~Umesh

Heh, my ex-boss would die seeing something like this :-) Just one comment, does GCOV have a flag for a third category of lines, like "undesired to execute"? This would make the summary of <http://chandlerc.net/llvm-coverage/lib/Target/PowerPC/ PPCHazardRecognizers.cpp.gcov.html> much more favorable. Nice work! Cheers, Gabor

On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Øyvind Harboe <oyvind.harboe at zylin.com> wrote: > On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 10:34 PM, Reid Kleckner <reid.kleckner at gmail.com> wrote: >> An easier way would be to use a coverage tool like gcov to see what's >> actually *used* when the app is run normally.  Then you can ask the >> question, what percentage of all lines of code are dead? > > We need something that can do this using static analysis... Otherwise > we can just use Eclipse and search for reference as a...

...to lcov’s ‘.info’ format. The problem is that the region-based counter definitions in SBCC can span source code regions that can contain blank lines (or lines with only comments). Converting this to lcov’s line-based format skews our line and hit counts wildly compared to reports we generate from gcov data. E.g, a ‘for’ loop might span 10 lines in the source code, but if 7 of those are comments or blank lines, gcov counts only the 3 lines that are executable while SBCC counts all 10 because at least one counter will span the whole block. llvm-cov has no visibility into the source code so we can...