From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14650 invoked by alias); 15 Nov 2012 01:53:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 13531 invoked by uid 55); 15 Nov 2012 01:52:54 -0000 From: "tejohnson at google dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug bootstrap/55051] [4.8 Regression] profiledbootstrap failed Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2012 01:53:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: bootstrap X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: tejohnson at google dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.8.0 X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2012-11/txt/msg01347.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051 --- Comment #20 from Teresa Johnson 2012-11-15 01:52:45 UTC --- On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 5:42 PM, hubicka at ucw dot cz wrote: > > http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=55051 > > --- Comment #19 from Jan Hubicka 2012-11-15 01:42:55 UTC --- >> Oh got it - it is this one, right?: >> >> profiling:/home/tejohnson/extra/gcc_trunk_3_obj/libcpp/files.gcda:Invocation >> mismatch - some data files may have been removed > > Yes, it is this one. >> >> I think this one was there before, but I had to modify it after my >> histogram change. I will take a look. > > Also could you please make a patch to make maybe_hot_count_p to use > hitogram driven cutoff? Otherwise the histograms would be completely > unused for 4.8 and it would be stupid to carry all the extra data > for no use. I would like this to be done soon, since I plan to base > some of inliner re-tunning to be based on this. Ok, I can do that. I had tried that but didn't see any gain yet (need to take a look at my results again). I have been playing with teasing apart the various uses of this cutoff (inlining vs instruction selection vs etc) too, but can do that in a later release once the appropriate individual cutoffs are tuned. I also have a loop unroller patch on the google branch that uses this that needs to be ported to trunk. It was in the original working set patch I sent for review, that ended up being split out and revised heavily. Shall I resubmit this part for 4.8 or is it too late? Thanks, Teresa > > The mismatch is independent problem, yes. > > Honza > > -- > Configure bugmail: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email > ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- > You are on the CC list for the bug. -- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson@google.com | 408-460-2413