This is intermediate result, which is meant to be consumed by further post-processing. For this reason I'd prefer to put a number without that percentage sign.
I'd just output (int)(probability*100000000+0.5). Does this look good for you? Or maybe change that to 1000000 since six digits are more than enough. I don't see a reason to intentionally drop precision though. Note that for the actual probability, the best way to store it is to store the edge count, since the probability is just edge_count/bb_count. But this causes disparity in the formats of the two probabilities. On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Dehao Chen <de...@google.com> wrote: > Let's use %d to replace %f (manual conversion, let's do xx%). > > Dehao > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Yi Yang <ahyan...@google.com> wrote: >> Fixed. >> >> Also, I spotted some warnings caused by me using "%lf"s in snprintf(). >> I changed these to "%f" and tested. >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Dehao Chen <de...@google.com> wrote: >>> You don't need extra space to store file name in locus_information_t. >>> Use pointer instead. >>> >>> Dehao >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Yi Yang <ahyan...@google.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I refactored the code and added comments. A bug (prematurely breaking >>>> from a loop) was fixed during the refactoring. >>>> >>>> (My last mail was wrongly set to HTML instead of plain text. I >>>> apologize for that.) >>>> >>>> 2014-06-30 Yi Yang <ahyan...@google.com> >>>> >>>> * auto-profile.c (get_locus_information) >>>> (fill_invalid_locus_information, record_branch_prediction_results) >>>> (afdo_calculate_branch_prob, afdo_annotate_cfg): Main comparison and >>>> reporting logic. >>>> * cfg-flags.def (PREDICTED_BY_EXPECT): Add an extra flag representing >>>> an edge's probability is predicted by annotations. >>>> * predict.c (combine_predictions_for_bb): Set up the extra flag on an >>>> edge when appropriate. >>>> * common.opt (fcheck-branch-annotation) >>>> (fcheck-branch-annotation-threshold=): Add an extra GCC option to turn >>>> on report >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 3:20 PM, Xinliang David Li <davi...@google.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> > Hi Yi, >>>> > >>>> > 1) please add comments before new functions as documentation -- follow >>>> > the coding style guideline >>>> > 2) missing documenation on the new flags (pointed out by Gerald) >>>> > 3) Please refactor the check code in afdo_calculate_branch_prob into a >>>> > helper function >>>> > >>>> > 4) the change log is not needed for google branches, but if provided, >>>> > the format should follow the style guide (e.g, function name in () ). >>>> > >>>> > David >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:07 AM, Yi Yang <ahyan...@google.com> wrote: >>>> >> Hi, >>>> >> >>>> >> This patch adds an option. When the option is enabled, GCC will add a >>>> >> record about it in an elf section called >>>> >> ".gnu.switches.text.branch.annotation" for every branch. >>>> >> >>>> >> gcc/ >>>> >> >>>> >> 2014-06-27 Yi Yang <ahyan...@google.com> >>>> >> >>>> >> * auto-profile.c: Main comparison and reporting logic. >>>> >> * cfg-flags.def: Add an extra flag representing an edge's >>>> >> probability is predicted by annotations. >>>> >> * predict.c: Set up the extra flag on an edge when appropriate. >>>> >> * common.opt: Add an extra GCC option to turn on this report >>>> >> mechanism
