gulfem added a comment. In D122336#3406186 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D122336#3406186>, @vsk wrote:
> Sorry for ay delayed replies - I've switched teams at Apple and find it > difficult to keep up with llvm reviews. > >> it's my understanding is that we might be generating coverage record for >> unused functions for TAPI. > > Coverage function records are emitted for unused functions because the > tooling needs to know which file/line ranges require a "0" execution count. Thanks for the background @vsk. That means that we need to generate a coverage record even for unused functions. Do you have any objection to the current solution (not pulling in profile runtime for such cases)? Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D122336/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D122336 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
