Gcov #107
Gcov #107
Conversation
|
This can be done later but I assume it is probably worth expanding this in terms of trees and architectures (mainline and arm64 maybe, given that the report came from Qualcomm?) |
This bug wasn't arch specific. There's diminishing returns for additional coverage IMO, though we do have the capacity. :)
The build will be, but the boot wont be. So let's wait to merge until https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210312192139.2503087-1-ndesaulniers@google.com/T/#u is in -next? |
Fair enough :)
Yes, I think that is smart. I will test and review in a little bit. |
|
On its way to Linus, then we could turn this on for mainline and next? https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210325043744.olufBBZcn%25akpm@linux-foundation.org/ |
This is a config that I suspect will have diminishing returns for the additional test coverage. I may eat my words someday, but I'll add the CI coverage if so. |
| @@ -185,6 +186,7 @@ builds: | |||
| - {<< : *x86_64_allmod_lto, << : *next, << : *llvm_full, boot: false, llvm_version: *llvm_tot} | |||
| - {<< : *x86_64_allno, << : *next, << : *llvm_full, boot: false, llvm_version: *llvm_tot} | |||
| - {<< : *x86_64_allyes, << : *next, << : *llvm_full, boot: false, llvm_version: *llvm_tot} | |||
| - {<< : *x86_64_gcov, << : *next, << : *llvm_full, boot: true, llvm_version: *llvm_tot} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
d'oh, when rebasing, I fixed the indentation of the first hunk but not this. Oh well.
No description provided.