vitalybuka added a comment. In D129832#3654066 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129832#3654066>, @MaskRay wrote:
> In D129832#3654040 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D129832#3654040>, @vitalybuka > wrote: > >> problem with included files that we don't know which non-inlined version of >> the function will endup in the binary >> so using this option, user may unintentionally disable instrumentation on >> all included headers, even when included from a different place > > This argument applies to vague linkage functions which are deduplicated. > There are many internal linkage function use cases which can benefit this, > e.g. `static inline`. > But thanks for the comment. Let me improve the summary. I understand how it benefit static inclines, it still unintentionally regress instrumentation for other code. we need at least a warning in documentation Also if this is not widespread problem, I would prefer we don't do that. Having mainsrc: in ignore list will complicate debugging false negatives. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D129832/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D129832 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
