vsk added inline comments. ================ Comment at: test/Profile/profile-summary.c:5 @@ +4,3 @@ +// RUN: %clang %s -o - -mllvm -disable-llvm-optzns -emit-llvm -S -fprofile-instr-use=%t.profdata | FileCheck %s +// +int begin(int i) { ---------------- davidxl wrote: > vsk wrote: > > ISTM that a lot of the lines in this file do not contribute additional > > coverage of the changes introduced by your patch. > > > > We already have tests which show that the summary code works > > (`general.proftext`). I think we just need 1 empty function with 1 counter > > in this file. We don't need to check that the entire detailed summary > > appears in the metadata, just one cutoff entry should suffice. > That test is actually not as good for testing summary computation as this > one. Perhaps we can simplify this test and move this test (removing the clang > dump part) into llvm-profdata dir. Makes sense to me.
http://reviews.llvm.org/D18289 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits