On 01.08.2018 09:27, Christos Zoulas wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> Kamil Rytarowski  <[email protected]> wrote:
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>> -=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>> On 31.07.2018 10:28, Christos Zoulas wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> Kamil Rytarowski  <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm for removal of gprof and deduplication of .a files in the base.
>>>>
>>>> While there, can we get rid of moncontrol(3), profil(2) and all the
>>>> corresponding code?
>>>
>>> I constantly see proposals to remove things from base without replacing
>>> the functionality first. Yes, the current state is poor but the 
>>> "hand hurts, cut hand" approach is worse.
>>>
>>> christos
>>>
>>
>> The original proposal contained an analysis of gperftools as an
>> immediate replacement through pkgsrc (it requires Perl).
> 
> yes, gperftools could fit the bill.
> 
>> And while there, there was a process of analysis of the compiler-rt
>> profile [coverage] feature during GSoC (while porting libFuzzer, we were
>> researching whether we need it at that point - but the conclusion was
>> that it's not required for fuzzing).
> 

We will get 'LLVM profile' once the compiler-rt project will be merged
with base (but probably with just Clang/LLVM). It could be treated as a
modern -pg replacement.

I've ported it with local patches, but there were few failing tests
around left. I keep it on my TODO queues maybe to be picked by a GSoC
student ( http://wiki.netbsd.org/users/kamil/proposals/ ).

> christos
> 


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to