similar to: [PATCH for-next 0/9] LLVM coverage support for Xen

Introduce the functionality in order to fill the hooks of the cov_sysctl_ops struct. Signed-off-by: Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau at citrix.com> --- Cc: Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3 at citrix.com> Cc: George Dunlap <George.Dunlap at eu.citrix.com> Cc: Ian Jackson <ian.jackson at eu.citrix.com> Cc: Jan Beulich <jbeulich at suse.com> Cc: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk

xfs_is_valid_magicnum is not actually a generic function that checks for magic numbers, instead it checks only for superblock's one. Signed-off-by: Paulo Alcantara <pcacjr at zytor.com> --- core/fs/xfs/xfs.c | 13 +++++-------- core/fs/xfs/xfs.h | 19 ++++++++++--------- 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) diff --git a/core/fs/xfs/xfs.c b/core/fs/xfs/xfs.c index

Any ideas folks? Thanks, Dan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Kay <serphakay at hotmail.com> Date: Sep 19, 2007 10:52 AM Subject: win32-service of win32utils To: djberg96 at gmail.com I''m writing some scripts to programmatically change the user account of running a windows service. So I downloaded one of the windows utilities, win32-service, and wrote my scripts.

Hi Ernest, I''m cc''ing the win32utils-devel mailing list in case anyone has any ideas. --- Ernest Ellingson <erne at powernav.com> wrote: > Daniel Berger wrote: > > >Hi Ernest, > > > >Me again. I just realized that it''s just a bug in > my > >documentation (duh). You can pass arguments to the > >Service.start method.

Besides supporting newer version of xfs file system, this patch also does some code refactoring and fix completely broken listing and searching on v2-3 node directories. Cc: Gene Cumm <gene.cumm at gmail.com> Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa at zytor.com> Cc: Raphael S. Carvalho <raphael.scarv at gmail.com> Cc: Ady <ady-sf at hotmail.com> Signed-off-by: Paulo Alcantara <pcacjr

This pull request contains the XFS filesystem driver for Syslinux. Due to historical reasons (SGI IRIX's design of disk layouts), the first sector in the primary AG on XFS filesystems contains the superblock, which is a problem with BIOSes, since VBRs must be loaded up from the first sector of the active partition. Thus, we needed to handle this issue by putting the Syslinux bootsector

rkotler at mipsswbrd006-le:~/caviumllvm/build/test$ make Making LLVM 'lit.site.cfg' file... Making LLVM unittest 'lit.site.cfg' file... ( ulimit -t 600 ; ulimit -d 512000 ; ulimit -m 512000 ; ulimit -s 8192 ; \ /usr/bin/python /home/rkotler/workspace/llvm/utils/lit/lit.py -s -v . ) XPASS: LLVM :: tools/llvm-cov/llvm-cov.test (8916 of 9784) ******************** TEST

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

I found a small (easily worked around) bug in service.c. The accessor for the start user is called "start_name", but create_service tries to access "@service_start_name". A simple "service.instance_eval{@service_start_name = ''name''} works around it, but I thought ya''ll might want to fix it. BTW, thanks for win32-utils... I don''t like

On Feb 12, 2014, at 11:43 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Bob Wilson <bob.wilson at apple.com> wrote: > > On Feb 12, 2014, at 10:31 AM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Justin is making nice commits for llvm-cov, so I thought we may continue this

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 create gcov proc dir user /proc/xen, we are

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 create gcov proc dir user /proc/xen, we are

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

I think what you're looking for is something like Doxygen or CodeViz that can generate (imperfect) call graphs for you. It sounds like you just need a rough list of functions that might be unused to start with. -Scott On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 1:42 AM, Øyvind Harboe <oyvind.harboe at zylin.com>

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

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 =

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

I’m working to implement Source Based Code Coverage in a workflow that uses lcov for report generation. We’ve customized our llvm-cov to add a command to convert the SBCC counter data 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

On Mon, May 26, 2008 at 11:27 PM, Gabor Greif <gabor at mac.com> wrote: > Heh, > > my ex-boss would die seeing something like this :-) It's not too hard to produce, let me know if you want details, or ping me on IRC. > Just one comment, does GCOV have a flag for > a third category of lines, like "undesired to execute"? Nope. I'm a subscriber to the

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