similar to: [LLVMdev] make check issue with llvm-cov

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 single test for

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

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

Hi all, I was trying to generate lcov test coverage reports for xapian-core but got an out of memory error: $ lcov --capture --directory . --output-file xapian-core.info Capturing coverage data from . Found gcov version: 4.7.3 Scanning . for .gcda files ... Found 270 data files in . Processing bin/xapian-progsrv.gcda Out of memory! These are the steps I followed in xapian-core directory

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

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

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

Hi, I ran into the bug/feature request that you cannot flush gcov buffers while the app is running. They are only called when you exit the 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`.

We do have a gcov "flush" implementation. It should be emitted with the normal coverage code. Is it not showing up? -bw On Feb 5, 2013, at 4:20 PM, John Harrison <ash.gti at gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I ran into the bug/feature request that you cannot flush gcov buffers while the app is running. They are only called when you exit the program, since the flush functions

From: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@citrix.com> Split coverage informations extracted from xencov utility. This script accept coverage blob either as file or from input and extract into files compatible with gcc format (gcda). Signed-off-by: Frediano Ziglio <frediano.ziglio@citrix.com> --- tools/misc/Makefile | 2 +- tools/misc/xencov_split | 191

Hi All, I want to provide a solution that presents code coverage reports that include the aggregated code-counts across many binaries. Our test engineers currently do this using gcov-mode by merged .gcda data files. We can do a similar merge of the .profraw files, so that the many binaries are represented in one .profdata file; However, llvm-cov will only generate reports based on one binary at

Hi, I recently upgraded our PDC to Samba 3.0.20 from 3.0.11. Unfortunately the user manager (usrmgr.exe) does not show all the users anymore. I cannot find the real culprit yet, but: Oct 28 19:18:08 [slapd] conn=2886 op=8 SRCH base="ou=people,dc=aub.nl,dc=aub,dc=nl" scope=2 deref=0 filter="(&(uid=*)(objectClass=sambaSamAccount))"_ Oct 28 19:18:08 [slapd] conn=2886 op=8

This works: class X def X.initialize( stuff ) end end X.initialize("bla") However stubbing it doesn,t: require ''test/unit'' require ''stubba'' class X def X.initialize( stuff ) end end class XTest < Test::Unit::TestCase def test_ X.stubs(:initialize).with("bla")

Hi guys, I was wondering why this piece of code doesn't work: foreach (i = c(1.25,1.50)) %dopar% { assign(paste("test_",i,sep=""),i) } but, this does: foreach (i = c(1.25,1.50)) %do% { assign(paste("test_",i,sep=""),i) } Obviously, the difference is %dopar% vs. %do%. If I use %do%, I get objects test_1.25 and test_1.50, but I don't get these

Hi folks, I'm trying to do something that seems like it should easy, but it apparently isn't. I have two large matrices, both containing a number of missing values at different cells. I would like to average these matrices, but the NAs are preventing me. I get a "non-numeric argument to binary operator" error. That's the first problem.

Dear all, I am trying to read a bunch of csv files using read.table() that are named "test_xxxxxx.csv" where "xxxxxx" has no particular pattern. Is there a way of reading all the files by specifying a truncated file name e.g. "test_" with some wild card characters, or would I have to laboriously create some vector with the "xxxxxx" names and iterate or

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 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 discussion now. > The quick-and-dirty implementation of coverage (in asan) is getting some early users and they seem to be happy. > AsanCoverage allows to collect per-function or per-basic-block coverage

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