zturner added a comment. In https://reviews.llvm.org/D47708#1126669, @lemo wrote:
> Doesn't the LIT based test drop the split-function case (originally > produced with PGO)? > > Sorry for being late to the party, but it seems beneficial to have both LIT > *and* checked in binaries since in general they are complementary: checking > against freshly built binaries only covers a matching set of toolchain > components (in particular it's hard to cover the cross-targeting scenarios). > > Other than the inconvenience with Phabricator, is there a reason not to > include the original tests as well? The size of the binaries? At least when it comes to checked in executables, we trigger virus scanners sometimes which is pretty annoying. I don't mind a checked in PDB, but they get pretty big sometimes and you have to go out of your way to make them small by specifying things like `/nodefaultlib`. But if you can get PDBs below about 200k, then checking them in might not be so bad. But I'd like to avoid checking in executables. https://reviews.llvm.org/D47708 _______________________________________________ lldb-commits mailing list lldb-commits@lists.llvm.org http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-commits
