[PATCH] gprof: Copy a simple test from glibc

[H.J. Lu]

On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 12:56 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
>
> On 28.03.2025 16:23, H.J. Lu wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 1:46 AM Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 07.03.2025 00:00, H.J. Lu wrote:
> >>> Copy a simple gprof test from glibc to test the basic gprof functionality.
> >>>
> >>> PR gprof/32764
> >>> * Makefile.am (SUBDIRS): Add testsuite
> >>> * configure.ac (AC_CONFIG_FILES): Removed.
> >>> (AC_OUTPUT): Add Makefile testsuite/Makefile
> >>> po/Makefile.in:po/Make-in.
> >>> (AM_CONDITIONAL): Add NATIVE.
> >>> * Makefile.in: Regenerated.
> >>> * configure: Likewise.
> >>> * testsuite/Makefile.am: New file.
> >>> * testsuite/tst-gmon-gprof.sh: Likewise.
> >>> * testsuite/tst-gmon.c: Likewise.
> >>> * testsuite/Makefile.in: Generated.
> >>
> >> This and the other new test fail for me on both x86-64 systems I tried - the
> >> f3 line isn't present in gprof output. I fear I don't have the time to
> >> investigate from grounds up. IOW either I need pointers that make
> >> investigation reasonably easy, or I'll propose to disable the tests again
> >> until this is sorted. The one thing I did check is that the object file has
> >> all the supposed calls to mcount(). If it matters, one system is using gcc5,
> >> the other gcc7.
> >
> > These tests work for me with gcc 5.4.1 and 7.4.1.  Please try
> >
> > https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2025-March/140257.html
>
> Well, tst-gmon.o clearly had debug info (incl .debug_line) already. So no
> difference there. Ftaod tst-gmon similarly has debug info (incl .debug_line).
> Must be something else, possibly in gprof itself.
>
> Jan

Can you send me your gprof build directory, including tests?

-- 
H.J.