[llvm-dev] Ignoring coverage for noreturn decls

[Harlan Haskins via llvm-dev]

Hi all,

Recently I’ve noticed in coverage profiles that llvm_unreachable and the like are considered uncovered because there’s no special behavior in instrumentation to ‘ignore’ noreturn paths.

While I don’t necessarily think it’s ideal to ignore all noreturn decls, I think there’s definitely room for some heuristics around ignoring things like llvm_unreachable (perhaps opt-in?). I’m investigating emitting a zero region for all noreturn decls whilst codegenning, as a start.

Anyone have any input as to a) if this is a good idea, or b) how best to implement and expose it?

Thanks,
Harlan