leonardchan added a comment. In D63155#1563229 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D63155#1563229>, @xur wrote:
> This patch does not make sense to me. > > The reason of failing with -fexperimental-new-pass-manager is because we > don't do PGO instrumentation at -O0. This is due to the fact that PGO > instrumentation/use passes are under > PassBuilder::buildPerModuleDefaultPipeline. > > This patch add a pass > > MPM.addPass(PGOInstrumentationGenCreateVar(PGOOpt->ProfileFile)); > > which only gives you the wrong signal of instrumentation is done. > > I wrote pass PGOInstrumentationGenCreateVar only for some trick interactions > for thinlto under ldd for CSPGO. > Regular FDO should not use it. > > The right fix is to enable PGO instrumentation and use in pass builder for O0. > > I would like to request to revert this patch. As an alternative, could I instead request that we remove the BackendUtil changes and just mark the runs in gcc-flag-compatibility.c with `-fno-experimental-new-pass-manager`. This way we could clarify that under the new PM, we shouldn't run PGO at -O0? If not, I'll revert this patch as is. Repository: rL LLVM CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION https://reviews.llvm.org/D63155/new/ https://reviews.llvm.org/D63155 _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list cfe-commits@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
