Re: mis-annotated inlined function

[Anton B. <an...@sa...>]

Hi,
 
> If case2 is addressed, it would be nice to have a command option to
> enable the user to choose how inline function samples should be
> accounted (either attributed to themselves or to the parent function). I
> found this "bug" is sometimes a "feature" and was very handy in some of
> my experiments. Sometimes is good to have a smaller number of functions
> aggregating a larger number of samples. I would be disappointed if this
> "feature" was removed. :) Not sure if you were already planning this...

I don't see how it could be considered a feature :) You are depending on
compiler behaviour here and the function may not get inlined even if you
mark it. Build to build your samples could get attributed to the
function or the parent function, leading to very confusing results.

Could you use callgraphs for this instead?

Anton