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 4BD4639B3C55; Thu, 24 Jun 2021 19:20:14 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org 4BD4639B3C55
From: "ndesaulniers at google dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug gcov-profile/80223] RFE: Exclude functions from profile
 instrumentation
Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 19:20:13 +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: 7.0
X-Bugzilla-Keywords: 
X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement
X-Bugzilla-Who: ndesaulniers at google dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: ASSIGNED
X-Bugzilla-Resolution: 
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Flags: 
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: 
Message-ID: <bug-80223-4-vLPhHd7caH@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-80223-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-80223-4@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
X-BeenThere: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Gcc-bugs mailing list <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/options/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://gcc.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gcc-bugs>,
 <mailto:gcc-bugs-request@gcc.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2021 19:20:14 -0000

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D80223

--- Comment #23 from Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers at google dot com> ---
(In reply to Fangrui Song from comment #18)
> I
> think a similar topic may need to be raided on llvm-dev side as I feel th=
is
> is the tip of the iceberg - more attributes can be similarly leveraged. S=
o,
> how about a llvm-dev discussion?

Sure.
llvm-dev RFC: https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2021-June/151509.ht=
ml
llvm patch: https://reviews.llvm.org/D104810=