public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug tree-optimization/106896] [13 Regression] ICE in to_sreal_scale, at profile-count.cc:339 since r13-2288-g61c4c989034548f4
Date: Fri, 03 Mar 2023 16:18:05 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-106896-4-eLEMwkN9qZ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-106896-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=106896

--- Comment #10 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
The problem the assert is trying to solve is that local counters are all
frequencies relative to the entry block count, while IPA counters are absolute
values within the whole program. So comparing them mixes apples and oranges.

Normally if function has IPA profile, all counts within the function body
should be IPA.  Problem here is that this that we propagated the fact that
function always callls cold function into the entry block but somehow we mark
the first basic block as estimated locally which does not make sense.

This is inconsistency coming from updates after pcom.
We need to live with inconsistent profiles (since it is not always possible to
make them fully right) so I will patch to_sreal to simply give up and return 1
here.  That is what we do for unknown probabilities.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-03-03 16:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-09-09 14:12 [Bug tree-optimization/106896] New: [13 Regression] ICE in to_sreal_scale, at profile-count.cc:339 asolokha at gmx dot com
2022-09-12  7:43 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106896] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-12 11:21 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-12 14:13 ` [Bug tree-optimization/106896] [13 Regression] ICE in to_sreal_scale, at profile-count.cc:339 since r13-2288-g61c4c989034548f4 marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-12 14:26 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-14 12:43 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-14 13:41 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-18  8:47 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-10-26  9:07 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-12-19 23:25 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-02-06 12:01 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-03 16:18 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2023-03-06 10:34 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-14  8:11 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-03-14  8:12 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-106896-4-eLEMwkN9qZ@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).