Ok. Rong, can you help commit the parameter default setting patch? thanks,
David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Rong Xu <x...@google.com> wrote: > We have seen the issue before. It does fail the profile boostrap as it > reads a wrong gcda file. > I thought it had been fixed. (The fix was as David mentioned, setting > the default value of the parameter to 0). > > -Rong > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Xinliang David Li <davi...@google.com> > wrote: >> I need to understand why this affects profile bootstrap -- is this due >> to file name conflict? >> >> The fix is wrong -- please do not remove the parameter. If it is a >> problem, a better fix is to change the default parameter value to 0. >> >> David >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Teresa Johnson <tejohn...@google.com> >> wrote: >>> cc'ing Rong and David since this came from LIPO support. >>> >>> The patch as-is removes the one use of PARAM_GCOV_DEBUG (which is on >>> by default) without removing the parameter itself. What is the failure >>> mode you see from this code? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Teresa >>> >>> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Dinar Temirbulatov >>> <di...@kugelworks.com> wrote: >>>> Hello >>>> >>>> This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 >>>> branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for >>>> google 4.8? >>>> thanks, Dinar. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
