echristo added inline comments.
================
Comment at: lib/CodeGen/CGDebugInfo.cpp:2743-2745
if (LinkageName == Name || (!CGM.getCodeGenOpts().EmitGcovArcs &&
!CGM.getCodeGenOpts().EmitGcovNotes &&
+ !CGM.getCodeGenOpts().ProfileDebug &&
----------------
danielcdh wrote:
> echristo wrote:
> > Should we be encapsulating all of these for profile debug info? I.e. I
> > think coverage analysis is going to want the same things.
> Do you mean that -fcoverage also implies -fprofile-debug?
>
> I think the reason we introduce -fprofile-debug is that it has different
> requirments for debug info than coverage/sanitizer. E.g. we want to emit
> discriminator for -fprofile-debug, but not coverage/sanitizer.
So, what are the differences here? I imagine that profile debugging will want
accurate source information. Perhaps we should hash this out in the thread that
dblaikie has started on llvm-dev.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D25435
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
