Coverage analysis update

[Chris Johns]

On 07/07/2017 00:34, Joel Sherrill wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Cillian O'Donnell <cpodonnell8 at gmail.com
> <mailto:cpodonnell8 at gmail.com>> wrote:
> It will ignore records when it thinks things are inconsistent. This can occur
> when a method appears in two different executables and has different
> sizes. The cause of this is usually padding at the end of the method so
> the subsequent method in memory starts on a nice cache-line alignment.
> The code tries to recognize the nops/padding at the end and ignore them.

The code in the linked executable can be different to the object file. The
linker does different things on different architectures and different link orders.

> When the padding inserted by ld changes or the objdump output being> parsed changes, covoar needs to be adjusted.

This means fragile.

> The ignored record message I saw is in the code that reads Couverture
> trace records. The info in the record appears to be inconsistent with the
> code to which it has been matched.

Sorry, I do not understand why this difference is happening? I understand it is
object files vs executable, what I do not understand is why the object files are
being referenced, why not just use the executable?

Chris