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
