From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 29011 invoked by alias); 26 Aug 2008 06:19:20 -0000 Received: (qmail 29002 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Aug 2008 06:19:19 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mail.sysgo.com (HELO mail.sysgo.com) (62.8.134.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 06:18:15 +0000 Received: from donald.sysgo.com (unknown [172.20.1.30]) by mail.sysgo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FDE37C7BA; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:18:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from koretsu (hbl-lap.sysgo.com [172.22.17.12]) by donald.sysgo.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29B22364001; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 08:18:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from hbl by koretsu with local (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1KXjDo-0001T8-2p; Mon, 25 Aug 2008 23:03:32 +0200 Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:22:00 -0000 From: Holger Blasum To: nimble dude Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: Can gcc-4.2 be used to measure coverage on SMP platforms? Message-ID: <20080825210326.GA5312@koretsu> References: <1d7c6ac80808142036k7459eb68hbebb027615cc2fcb@mail.gmail.com> <1d7c6ac80808232301y2fcad20bya92de69adc4be776@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1d7c6ac80808232301y2fcad20bya92de69adc4be776@mail.gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-08/txt/msg00285.txt.bz2 On Sat, Aug 23, 2008 at 11:01:29PM -0700, nimble dude wrote: > > Searching gcc manuals for further info on gcov did not yield any > > information. The documentation on SMP and gcov support is rather > > sparse. > > - Does gcc-4.2 support atomic_increment of the gcov related information? > > - If so, is there another option that needs to be specified along with "gcc" > 2nd try... > Would be grateful if somebody could confirm one way or the other. Concerning gcc version 3: "Especially our implementation does not support threading and is not able to cope very well with constructors, destructors and dynamically loaded objects yet." J Hubicka 2005, Profile driven optimisations in GCC, in: Proceedings of the GCC Developers' Summit, June 21-24, 2005, Ottawa, Canada, pp. 107-124, http://www.gccsummit.org/2005/2005-GCC-Summit-Proceedings.pdf But that was in 2005, for gcc-4.x you may want to double-check with the lcov list https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-coverage that also has gcov users. (Note: if you do not want exact numbers but just the conservative information whether something is covered at all or not you might make use of the non-SMP code instrumentation (please carefully observe the generated code on your platform) - one of (possibly more) preparations (eg avoid counter overflow) would be to modify the instrumentation in find_spanning_tree.) > > - Does gcc-4.3.1 support atomic_increment of gcov counters > > natively(i.e, without further flags)? Is there any indication that atomic_increment of gcov counters is supported non-natively, that is with further flags? -- Holger Blasum SYSGO AG Office Mainz Web: http://www.sysgo.com