> On Mon, 2020-02-03 at 10:04 -0600, Pat Haugen wrote:
> > On 2/3/20 2:17 AM, Jiufu Guo wrote:
> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump-times "REG_BR_PROB 937042044" 1
> > > "loop2_unroll"} } */
> >
> > Sorry I didn't catch this addition to the original testcase earlier, but I
> > wonder how stable this test is going to be. If there are future changes to
> > default count/probability, or changes in their representation, this may
> > fail and need to be updated. The fact that the loop is still getting
> > aligned is the main concern.
> Unless you're really interested in those probabilities, I'd suggest not
> testing for them. If you really need to test for them, then I'd
> suggest testing for them being "close" rather than a specific value for
> REG_BR_PROB.
Note that REG_BR_PROB now encodes the actual probability as well as the
profile quality (i.e. it is m_val * 8 + m_quality).
We may want to invent better way to dump them, but it is better to match
for CFG edge probability rather than the REG_BR_PROB_NOTE.
honza
>
> jeff
>
