Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH for-next 6/9] kconfig: add llvm coverage option

[Roger Pau Monné <roger.pau@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Nov 08, 2017 at 01:13:29AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 26.10.17 at 12:10, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:08:21AM +0100, Roger Pau Monné wrote:
> >> On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 11:03:13AM +0100, Wei Liu wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:19:35AM +0100, Roger Pau Monne wrote:
> >> > >  config GCOV
> >> > >        bool "Gcov Support"
> >> > >        depends on !LIVEPATCH
> >> > 
> >> > && !LLVM_COVERAGE
> >> 
> >> That was my idea, but sadly that's not possible because you generate a
> >> circular dependency. The best solution that I found is to only mark
> >> one as exclusive (ie: have depends !GCOV in the LLVM_COVERAGE option
> >> below).
> > 
> > In that case, why not just use "choice" to let user pick the
> > implementation?
> 
> Plus then this choice should probably have an auto-detect option
> just like gcov's gcc version one - at least I assume that it should
> be pretty straightforward to tell at build time which variant to use.
> In fact - what would happen if one enabled the wrong option for
> the compiler in use? IOW I wonder whether auto-detection (and
> then also for the gcc version) should be the only valid mode).

I don't plan to introduce llvm/clang version choices here, I think
autodetection should be fine.

I can remove the gcc ones also, leaving this as a boolean choice (ie:
enable code coverage support), but I would like to have some
confirmation from the gcc side.

Thanks, Roger.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel