On Wed, Apr 29, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Caroline Tice <cmt...@google.com> wrote: > Here is a new patch to update the cold name partition so that it will > only be treated like a function name and be given a size on the > architectures that specifically define macros for such. > > I also updated the test case to try to only test on the appropriate > architectures. I am not sure I got the target triples correct for > this, so I would appreciate some extra attention to that in the > review. I have tested this new patch on my workstation and it works > as intended. I am in the process of bootstrapping with the new patch. > Assuming that the bootstrap passes, is this ok to commit? > > -- Caroline Tice > cmt...@google.com > > ChangeLog (gcc): > > 2015-04-29 Caroline Tice <cmt...@google.com> > > PR 65929 > * config/elfos.h (ASM_DECLARE_COLD_FUNCTION_NAME): New macro > definition. > (ASM_DECLARE_COLD_FUNCTION_SIZE): New macro definition. > * final.c (final_scan_insn): Use ASM_DECLARE_COLD_FUNCTION_NAME > instead of ASM_DECLARE_FUNCTION_NAME for cold partition name. > * varasm.c (assemble_end_function): Use > ASM_DECLARE_COLD_FUNCTION_SIZE > instead of ASM_DECLARE_FUNCTION_SIZE for cold partition size. > > ChangeLog (testsuite): > > 2015-04-29 Caroline Tice <cmt...@google.com> > > PR 65929 > * gcc.dg/tree-prof/cold_partition_label.c: Only check for cold > partition size on certain targets.
Documentation for new macros is missing (please see doc/tm.texi.in). Uros.
