When generating coverage maps, we were traversing the body as if it
were part of the parent function, but this doesn't make sense since
we're currently counting lambdas as separate functions.
llvm-svn: 230304
When tools like llvm-cov show regions, it's much easier to understand
what's happening if the condition of an if shows a counter as well as
the body.
llvm-svn: 229813
The coverage mapping generation code previously generated a large
number of redundant coverage regions and then tried to merge similar
ones back together. This then relied on some awkward heuristics to
prevent combining of regions that were importantly different but
happened to have the same count. The end result was inefficient and
hard to follow.
Now, we more carefully create the regions we actually want. This makes
it much easier to create regions at precise locations as well as
making the basic approach quite a bit easier to follow. There's still
a fair bit of complexity here dealing with included code and macro
expansions, but that's pretty hard to avoid without significantly
reducing the quality of data we provide.
I had to modify quite a few tests where the source ranges became more
precise or the old ranges seemed to be wrong anyways, and I've added
quite a few new tests since a large number of constructs didn't seem
to be tested before.
llvm-svn: 229748
Sorry for the noise, I managed to miss a bunch of recent regressions of
include orderings here. This should actually sort all the includes for
Clang. Again, no functionality changed, this is just a mechanical
cleanup that I try to run periodically to keep the #include lines as
regular as possible across the project.
llvm-svn: 225979
This state object makes things harder to reason about and isn't really
useful, since we can just emit the mappings before the state changes
rather than holding on to it.
llvm-svn: 224476
When generating coverage regions, we were doing a linear search
through the existing regions in order to try to merge related ones.
Most of the time this would find what it was looking for in a small
number of steps and it wasn't a big deal, but in cases with many
regions and few mergeable ones this leads to an absurd compile time
regression.
This changes the coverage mapping logic to do a single sort and then
merge as we go, which is a bit simpler and about 100 times faster.
I've also added FIXMEs on a couple of behaviours that seem a little
suspect, while keeping them behaving as they were - I'll look into
these soon.
The test changes here are mostly tedious reorganization, because the
ordering of regions we output has become slightly (but not completely)
more consistent from the almost completely arbitrary ordering we got
before.
llvm-svn: 218738
This struct has some members that are accessed directly and others
that need accessors, but it's all just public. This is confusing, so
I've changed it to a class and made more members private.
llvm-svn: 218737
The profile data format was recently updated and the new indexing api
requires the code coverage tool to know the function's hash as well
as the function's name to get the execution counts for a function.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4995
llvm-svn: 216208
This patch adds the '-fcoverage-mapping' option which
allows clang to generate the coverage mapping information
that can be used to provide code coverage analysis using
the execution counts obtained from the instrumentation
based profiling (-fprofile-instr-generate).
llvm-svn: 214752
Justin Bogner