From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48)
	id 24C653858D33; Mon, 27 Nov 2023 00:49:38 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 24C653858D33
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org;
	s=default; t=1701046178;
	bh=I9leUzHLpAyFVHJI93puwHBnWI3CFYkyy/YGi4C/xug=;
	h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From;
	b=pzoPEgggJRHW0HO2uCVrWTwUXvLT50eAzrzoykTV/rcvi6ZiwK4DHkvARLnMv9XoT
	 MMWCijjo5LzdmCkc1pDhvna8t6FJ39iihglncVeEv0BG81aZC0Vx+ANny9Sw5+Nn8l
	 SN7TP/D0oGGg3bvxidNUyK5jHqrWsZ37JN83ahww=
From: "zamazan4ik at tut dot by" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug gcov-profile/112717] .gcda profiles compatibility guarantees
 between GCC versions
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2023 00:49:38 +0000
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: gcov-profile
X-Bugzilla-Version: unknown
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: zamazan4ik at tut dot by
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-112717-4-QtHHxXEdaX@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-112717-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-112717-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
MIME-Version: 1.0
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.sourceware.org>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D112717

--- Comment #3 from Alexander Zaitsev <zamazan4ik at tut dot by> ---
> I thought this was documented but I don't see. There is no guarantee for =
forward or backwards compatibility at all. In fact iirc there is a version =
stored in the files to make sure the correct version is used with the versi=
on of tools/compiler.

Could we add this information to the documentation? Would be really helpful=
 to
the users to know this detail.

Since your answer am I right that right now it's a strong
recommendation/requirement to regenerate PGO profiles with each GCC update?=