From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by sourceware.org (Postfix, from userid 48) id A2E9E388C029; Wed, 10 Jun 2020 08:21:34 +0000 (GMT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 sourceware.org A2E9E388C029 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gcc.gnu.org; s=default; t=1591777294; bh=lVKomFKLsM7ytnf0nbFJiRfLPEGweO4EoRJdwXSDTcU=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=uHwpNzxsKYh8QlgH8lgvQ9sJfVie9sfxhpYCNNqFn4Yn/VLPTppZIzYMwubk4JnBw UTb60uCj6v91SRfNMBNILVWbNXS2xYuUxtfxhQX8n3N5fmZlrfgYItpbsfrENPgjRp mL0VkcjHaB8mK/UTtd82zsLGj0pYh6GCm1D1oU6Q= From: "marxin at gcc dot gnu.org" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug gcov-profile/95348] GCC records zero functions and modules in the profiling data file, ICC does NOT Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 08:21:34 +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: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: WAITING X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 11.0 X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2020 08:21:34 -0000 https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D95348 --- Comment #28 from Martin Li=C5=A1ka --- (In reply to Qing Zhao from comment #26) > > --- Comment #25 from Martin Li=C5=A1ka --- > >> I will try to get more data on our real application.=20 > >>=20 > >> one question: why not just delete the entire records whose counter is = zero > >> and delete the entire file whose counter is zero? > >=20 > > Because we need to distinguish in between situations where a function w= as > > really not executed (counter =3D=3D 0) and the situation where we miss = profile for > > a function. > Understood. However, is it possible to just provide an option for the us= er > to choose > to just delete all the zero records and files in order to save more space? It can be possible to add option for that, yes. To be honest, I don't have = much time to work on that right now. And you still haven't replied to my essential question: Why can't you merge profiles into one directory during run? Or at least merge to a reasonable number of folders that you'll merge later? Note that you can use -fprofile-dir=3Dpath with: %q{VAR} value of environment variable VAR which can be used to multiplex into multiple folders for concurrent process= es. > >=20 > > How exactly do you merge profiles? Do you run parallel invocation which= can > > take log2(N)? > We run serial merge adding one at a time right now.=20 > Is it possible for gcov-merge to add a new functionality to automatically > merge complete > Set of subdirectories? One would need to run it in multiple threads and I've made a Python script prototype: https://github.com/marxin/script-misc/blob/master/gcov-merge-parallel.py So yes, current GCOV streaming is far from being optimal, but with a small tweaks we can make it working for your scenario..=