> Ok, that sounds good. Here is the new patch. Is this ok for trunk if
> testing (bootstrap regression and lto profiledbootstrap) succeeds?
>
> Thanks,
> Teresa
>
> 2013-11-13 Teresa Johnson <tejohn...@google.com>
>
> * predict.c (drop_profile): Error is currently too strict.
> (handle_missing_profiles): Pass call_count to drop_profile.
OK, thanks
Honza
>
> Index: predict.c
> ===================================================================
> --- predict.c (revision 204704)
> +++ predict.c (working copy)
> @@ -2766,12 +2766,17 @@ estimate_loops (void)
> }
>
> /* Drop the profile for NODE to guessed, and update its frequency based on
> - whether it is expected to be HOT. */
> + whether it is expected to be hot given the CALL_COUNT. */
>
> static void
> -drop_profile (struct cgraph_node *node, bool hot)
> +drop_profile (struct cgraph_node *node, gcov_type call_count)
> {
> struct function *fn = DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (node->decl);
> + /* In the case where this was called by another function with a
> + dropped profile, call_count will be 0. Since there are no
> + non-zero call counts to this function, we don't know for sure
> + whether it is hot, and therefore it will be marked normal below. */
> + bool hot = maybe_hot_count_p (NULL, call_count);
>
> if (dump_file)
> fprintf (dump_file,
> @@ -2781,8 +2786,13 @@ static void
> /* We only expect to miss profiles for functions that are reached
> via non-zero call edges in cases where the function may have
> been linked from another module or library (COMDATs and extern
> - templates). See the comments below for handle_missing_profiles. */
> - if (!DECL_COMDAT (node->decl) && !DECL_EXTERNAL (node->decl))
> + templates). See the comments below for handle_missing_profiles.
> + Also, only warn in cases where the missing counts exceed the
> + number of training runs. In certain cases with an execv followed
> + by a no-return call the profile for the no-return call is not
> + dumped and there can be a mismatch. */
> + if (!DECL_COMDAT (node->decl) && !DECL_EXTERNAL (node->decl)
> + && call_count > profile_info->runs)
> {
> if (flag_profile_correction)
> {
> @@ -2792,8 +2802,8 @@ static void
> cgraph_node_name (node), node->order);
> }
> else
> - error ("Missing counts for called function %s/%i",
> - cgraph_node_name (node), node->order);
> + warning (0, "Missing counts for called function %s/%i",
> + cgraph_node_name (node), node->order);
> }
>
> profile_status_for_function (fn)
> @@ -2839,9 +2849,7 @@ handle_missing_profiles (void)
> && fn && fn->cfg
> && (call_count * unlikely_count_fraction >= profile_info->runs))
> {
> - bool maybe_hot = maybe_hot_count_p (NULL, call_count);
> -
> - drop_profile (node, maybe_hot);
> + drop_profile (node, call_count);
> worklist.safe_push (node);
> }
> }
> @@ -2863,11 +2871,7 @@ handle_missing_profiles (void)
> if (DECL_COMDAT (callee->decl) && fn && fn->cfg
> && profile_status_for_function (fn) == PROFILE_READ)
> {
> - /* Since there are no non-0 call counts to this function,
> - we don't know for sure whether it is hot. Indicate to
> - the drop_profile routine that function should be marked
> - normal, rather than hot. */
> - drop_profile (node, false);
> + drop_profile (node, 0);
> worklist.safe_push (callee);
> }
> }
>
> >
> > Honza
>
>
>
> --
> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
