Skip to content

codeCoverage example has dubious performance #18

Description

@wrwilliams

Per email from AT (former UMD student, works on PEBIL now), codeCoverage is notably slower than DynamoRIO's coverage tool. Having examined the code, I can say why: function calls are evil in a coverage tool and should only occur at startup/shutdown. It would be much more performant to ensure the mapping of block ID to human-readable data occurs at instrumentation time, and thereby each block simply needs to increment an array element.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions