[PATCH] D104871: [Docs] use -fprofile-generate for IR PGO and -fprofile-instr-generate for code coverage

[Reid Kleckner via Phabricator via cfe-commits]

rnk added inline comments.


================
Comment at: clang/docs/UsersManual.rst:2117-2118
 
-Clang also supports profiling via instrumentation. This requires building a
-special instrumented version of the code and has some runtime
 overhead during the profiling, but it provides more detailed results than a
----------------
I like the original paragraph here. The casual reader doesn't need to know about the two flavors of instrumentation, that detail can be added at the end of this section.


================
Comment at: clang/docs/UsersManual.rst:2197
 
 4. Build the code again using the ``-fprofile-instr-use`` option to specify the
    collected profile data.
----------------
This should be `fprofile-use`, correct?


================
Comment at: clang/docs/UsersManual.rst:2208-2211
 Profile generation using an alternative instrumentation method can be
 controlled by the GCC-compatible flags ``-fprofile-generate`` and
 ``-fprofile-use``. Although these flags are semantically equivalent to
 their GCC counterparts, they *do not* handle GCC-compatible profiles.
----------------
This is the right place to mention the `fprofile-instr-generate / use` flags.

It's worth retaining the note that, although Clang and GCC use the same command line flags to enable PGO, the profile data format is not compatible.


================
Comment at: clang/docs/UsersManual.rst:2219
   The ``-fprofile-generate`` and ``-fprofile-generate=`` flags will use
   an alternative instrumentation method for profile generation. When
   given a directory name, it generates the profile file
----------------
This probably needs edits too, it's not the alternative.


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D104871/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D104871