* [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts
@ 2022-10-11 12:43 Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-11 12:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] gcov: test line count for label in then/else block Jørgen Kvalsvik
` (2 more replies)
0 siblings, 3 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jørgen Kvalsvik @ 2022-10-11 12:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: richard.guenther, mliska, Jørgen Kvalsvik
The coverage support will under some conditions decide to split edges to
accurately report coverage. By running the test suite with/without this
edge splitting a small diff shows up, addressed by this patch, which
should catch future regressions.
Removing the edge splitting:
$ diff --git a/gcc/profile.cc b/gcc/profile.cc
--- a/gcc/profile.cc
+++ b/gcc/profile.cc
@@ -1244,19 +1244,7 @@ branch_prob (bool thunk)
Don't do that when the locuses match, so
if (blah) goto something;
is not computed twice. */
- if (last
- && gimple_has_location (last)
- && !RESERVED_LOCATION_P (e->goto_locus)
- && !single_succ_p (bb)
- && (LOCATION_FILE (e->goto_locus)
- != LOCATION_FILE (gimple_location (last))
- || (LOCATION_LINE (e->goto_locus)
- != LOCATION_LINE (gimple_location (last)))))
- {
- basic_block new_bb = split_edge (e);
- edge ne = single_succ_edge (new_bb);
- ne->goto_locus = e->goto_locus;
- }
+
if ((e->flags & (EDGE_ABNORMAL | EDGE_ABNORMAL_CALL))
&& e->dest != EXIT_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun))
need_exit_edge = 1;
Assuming the .gcov files from make chec-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=gcov.exp are
kept:
$ diff -r no-split-edge with-split-edge | grep -C 2 -E "^[<>]\s\s"
diff -r sans-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov with-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov
228c228
< -: 224: break;
---
> 1: 224: break;
231c231
< -: 227: break;
---
> #####: 227: break;
237c237
< -: 233: break;
---
> 2: 233: break;
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C: Add line count check.
* gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c: Likewise.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C | 8 ++++----
gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
index 9018b9a3a73..ee383b480a8 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
@@ -257,20 +257,20 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
switch (i) /* count(5) */
/* branch(end) */
{
- case 1:
+ case 1: /* count(1) */
result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
- break;
+ break; /* count(1) */
case 2:
result = do_something (1024);
break;
- case 3:
+ case 3: /* count(3) */
case 4:
/* branch(67) */
if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
/* branch(end) */
return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
- break;
+ break; /* count(2) */
default:
result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
switch_m++; /* count(1) */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
index 9d8ab1c1097..498d299b66b 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
@@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
{
case 1:
result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
- break;
+ break; /* count(1) */
case 2:
result = do_something (1024);
break;
@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
- break;
+ break; /* count(2) */
default:
result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
switch_m++; /* count(1) */
--
2.34.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/2] gcov: test line count for label in then/else block
2022-10-11 12:43 [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Jørgen Kvalsvik
@ 2022-10-11 12:43 ` Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-13 11:40 ` Richard Biener
2022-10-11 13:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Michael Matz
2022-10-13 11:39 ` Richard Biener
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jørgen Kvalsvik @ 2022-10-11 12:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: richard.guenther, mliska, Jørgen Kvalsvik
Add a test to catch regression in line counts for labels on top of
then/else blocks. Only the 'goto <label>' should contribute to the line
counter for the label, not the if.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c:
---
gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
index 498d299b66b..da7929ef7fc 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
@@ -110,6 +110,29 @@ lab2:
return 8; /* count(1) */
}
+int
+test_goto3 (int i, int j)
+{
+ if (j) goto else_; /* count(1) */
+
+top:
+ if (i) /* count(1) */
+ {
+ i = do_something (i);
+ }
+ else
+ {
+else_: /* count(1) */
+ j = do_something (j); /* count(2) */
+ if (j) /* count(2) */
+ {
+ j = 0; /* count(1) */
+ goto top; /* count(1) */
+ }
+ }
+ return 16;
+}
+
void
call_goto ()
{
@@ -117,6 +140,7 @@ call_goto ()
goto_val += test_goto1 (1);
goto_val += test_goto2 (3);
goto_val += test_goto2 (30);
+ goto_val += test_goto3 (0, 1);
}
/* Check nested if-then-else statements. */
@@ -260,7 +284,7 @@ main()
call_unref ();
if ((for_val1 != 12)
|| (for_val2 != 87)
- || (goto_val != 15)
+ || (goto_val != 31)
|| (ifelse_val1 != 31)
|| (ifelse_val2 != 23)
|| (ifelse_val3 != 246)
--
2.34.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] gcov: test line count for label in then/else block
2022-10-11 12:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] gcov: test line count for label in then/else block Jørgen Kvalsvik
@ 2022-10-13 11:40 ` Richard Biener
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2022-10-13 11:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jørgen Kvalsvik; +Cc: gcc-patches, mliska
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 2:43 PM Jørgen Kvalsvik
<jorgen.kvalsvik@woven-planet.global> wrote:
>
> Add a test to catch regression in line counts for labels on top of
> then/else blocks. Only the 'goto <label>' should contribute to the line
> counter for the label, not the if.
OK.
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c:
> ---
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> index 498d299b66b..da7929ef7fc 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> @@ -110,6 +110,29 @@ lab2:
> return 8; /* count(1) */
> }
>
> +int
> +test_goto3 (int i, int j)
> +{
> + if (j) goto else_; /* count(1) */
> +
> +top:
> + if (i) /* count(1) */
> + {
> + i = do_something (i);
> + }
> + else
> + {
> +else_: /* count(1) */
> + j = do_something (j); /* count(2) */
> + if (j) /* count(2) */
> + {
> + j = 0; /* count(1) */
> + goto top; /* count(1) */
> + }
> + }
> + return 16;
> +}
> +
> void
> call_goto ()
> {
> @@ -117,6 +140,7 @@ call_goto ()
> goto_val += test_goto1 (1);
> goto_val += test_goto2 (3);
> goto_val += test_goto2 (30);
> + goto_val += test_goto3 (0, 1);
> }
>
> /* Check nested if-then-else statements. */
> @@ -260,7 +284,7 @@ main()
> call_unref ();
> if ((for_val1 != 12)
> || (for_val2 != 87)
> - || (goto_val != 15)
> + || (goto_val != 31)
> || (ifelse_val1 != 31)
> || (ifelse_val2 != 23)
> || (ifelse_val3 != 246)
> --
> 2.34.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts
2022-10-11 12:43 [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-11 12:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] gcov: test line count for label in then/else block Jørgen Kvalsvik
@ 2022-10-11 13:55 ` Michael Matz
2022-10-11 13:57 ` Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-13 11:39 ` Richard Biener
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Michael Matz @ 2022-10-11 13:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jørgen Kvalsvik; +Cc: gcc-patches
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1535 bytes --]
Hello,
On Tue, 11 Oct 2022, Jørgen Kvalsvik via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The coverage support will under some conditions decide to split edges to
> accurately report coverage. By running the test suite with/without this
> edge splitting a small diff shows up, addressed by this patch, which
> should catch future regressions.
>
> Removing the edge splitting:
>
> $ diff --git a/gcc/profile.cc b/gcc/profile.cc
> --- a/gcc/profile.cc
> +++ b/gcc/profile.cc
> @@ -1244,19 +1244,7 @@ branch_prob (bool thunk)
> Don't do that when the locuses match, so
> if (blah) goto something;
> is not computed twice. */
> - if (last
> - && gimple_has_location (last)
> - && !RESERVED_LOCATION_P (e->goto_locus)
> - && !single_succ_p (bb)
> - && (LOCATION_FILE (e->goto_locus)
> - != LOCATION_FILE (gimple_location (last))
> - || (LOCATION_LINE (e->goto_locus)
> - != LOCATION_LINE (gimple_location (last)))))
> - {
> - basic_block new_bb = split_edge (e);
> - edge ne = single_succ_edge (new_bb);
> - ne->goto_locus = e->goto_locus;
> - }
> +
Assuming this is correct (I really can't say) then the comment needs
adjustments. It specifically talks about this very code you remove.
Ciao,
Michael.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts
2022-10-11 13:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Michael Matz
@ 2022-10-11 13:57 ` Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-11 14:00 ` Michael Matz
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jørgen Kvalsvik @ 2022-10-11 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Matz; +Cc: gcc-patches
On 11/10/2022 15:55, Michael Matz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tue, 11 Oct 2022, Jørgen Kvalsvik via Gcc-patches wrote:
>
>> The coverage support will under some conditions decide to split edges to
>> accurately report coverage. By running the test suite with/without this
>> edge splitting a small diff shows up, addressed by this patch, which
>> should catch future regressions.
>>
>> Removing the edge splitting:
>>
>> $ diff --git a/gcc/profile.cc b/gcc/profile.cc
>> --- a/gcc/profile.cc
>> +++ b/gcc/profile.cc
>> @@ -1244,19 +1244,7 @@ branch_prob (bool thunk)
>> Don't do that when the locuses match, so
>> if (blah) goto something;
>> is not computed twice. */
>> - if (last
>> - && gimple_has_location (last)
>> - && !RESERVED_LOCATION_P (e->goto_locus)
>> - && !single_succ_p (bb)
>> - && (LOCATION_FILE (e->goto_locus)
>> - != LOCATION_FILE (gimple_location (last))
>> - || (LOCATION_LINE (e->goto_locus)
>> - != LOCATION_LINE (gimple_location (last)))))
>> - {
>> - basic_block new_bb = split_edge (e);
>> - edge ne = single_succ_edge (new_bb);
>> - ne->goto_locus = e->goto_locus;
>> - }
>> +
>
> Assuming this is correct (I really can't say) then the comment needs
> adjustments. It specifically talks about this very code you remove.
>
>
> Ciao,
> Michael.
Michael,
I apologise for the confusion. The diff there is not a part of the change itself
(note the indentation) but rather a way to reproduce, or at least understand,
the type of change that would trigger the new test error. If it is too confusing
I can re-write the commit message.
Thanks,
Jørgen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts
2022-10-11 12:43 [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-11 12:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] gcov: test line count for label in then/else block Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-11 13:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Michael Matz
@ 2022-10-13 11:39 ` Richard Biener
2022-10-14 10:09 ` Jørgen Kvalsvik
2 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Richard Biener @ 2022-10-13 11:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jørgen Kvalsvik; +Cc: gcc-patches, mliska
On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 2:43 PM Jørgen Kvalsvik
<jorgen.kvalsvik@woven-planet.global> wrote:
>
> The coverage support will under some conditions decide to split edges to
> accurately report coverage. By running the test suite with/without this
> edge splitting a small diff shows up, addressed by this patch, which
> should catch future regressions.
>
> Removing the edge splitting:
>
> $ diff --git a/gcc/profile.cc b/gcc/profile.cc
> --- a/gcc/profile.cc
> +++ b/gcc/profile.cc
> @@ -1244,19 +1244,7 @@ branch_prob (bool thunk)
> Don't do that when the locuses match, so
> if (blah) goto something;
> is not computed twice. */
> - if (last
> - && gimple_has_location (last)
> - && !RESERVED_LOCATION_P (e->goto_locus)
> - && !single_succ_p (bb)
> - && (LOCATION_FILE (e->goto_locus)
> - != LOCATION_FILE (gimple_location (last))
> - || (LOCATION_LINE (e->goto_locus)
> - != LOCATION_LINE (gimple_location (last)))))
> - {
> - basic_block new_bb = split_edge (e);
> - edge ne = single_succ_edge (new_bb);
> - ne->goto_locus = e->goto_locus;
> - }
> +
> if ((e->flags & (EDGE_ABNORMAL | EDGE_ABNORMAL_CALL))
> && e->dest != EXIT_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun))
> need_exit_edge = 1;
>
> Assuming the .gcov files from make chec-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=gcov.exp are
> kept:
>
> $ diff -r no-split-edge with-split-edge | grep -C 2 -E "^[<>]\s\s"
> diff -r sans-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov with-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov
> 228c228
> < -: 224: break;
> ---
> > 1: 224: break;
> 231c231
> < -: 227: break;
> ---
> > #####: 227: break;
> 237c237
> < -: 233: break;
> ---
> > 2: 233: break;
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
OK.
Thanks,
Richard.
>
> * g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C: Add line count check.
> * gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c: Likewise.
> ---
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C | 8 ++++----
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c | 4 ++--
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
> index 9018b9a3a73..ee383b480a8 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
> @@ -257,20 +257,20 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
> switch (i) /* count(5) */
> /* branch(end) */
> {
> - case 1:
> + case 1: /* count(1) */
> result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
> - break;
> + break; /* count(1) */
> case 2:
> result = do_something (1024);
> break;
> - case 3:
> + case 3: /* count(3) */
> case 4:
> /* branch(67) */
> if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
> /* branch(end) */
> return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
> result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
> - break;
> + break; /* count(2) */
> default:
> result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
> switch_m++; /* count(1) */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> index 9d8ab1c1097..498d299b66b 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
> {
> case 1:
> result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
> - break;
> + break; /* count(1) */
> case 2:
> result = do_something (1024);
> break;
> @@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
> if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
> return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
> result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
> - break;
> + break; /* count(2) */
> default:
> result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
> switch_m++; /* count(1) */
> --
> 2.34.0
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts
2022-10-13 11:39 ` Richard Biener
@ 2022-10-14 10:09 ` Jørgen Kvalsvik
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jørgen Kvalsvik @ 2022-10-14 10:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard Biener; +Cc: gcc-patches, mliska
On 13/10/2022 13:39, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 11, 2022 at 2:43 PM Jørgen Kvalsvik
> <jorgen.kvalsvik@woven-planet.global> wrote:
>>
>> The coverage support will under some conditions decide to split edges to
>> accurately report coverage. By running the test suite with/without this
>> edge splitting a small diff shows up, addressed by this patch, which
>> should catch future regressions.
>>
>> Removing the edge splitting:
>>
>> $ diff --git a/gcc/profile.cc b/gcc/profile.cc
>> --- a/gcc/profile.cc
>> +++ b/gcc/profile.cc
>> @@ -1244,19 +1244,7 @@ branch_prob (bool thunk)
>> Don't do that when the locuses match, so
>> if (blah) goto something;
>> is not computed twice. */
>> - if (last
>> - && gimple_has_location (last)
>> - && !RESERVED_LOCATION_P (e->goto_locus)
>> - && !single_succ_p (bb)
>> - && (LOCATION_FILE (e->goto_locus)
>> - != LOCATION_FILE (gimple_location (last))
>> - || (LOCATION_LINE (e->goto_locus)
>> - != LOCATION_LINE (gimple_location (last)))))
>> - {
>> - basic_block new_bb = split_edge (e);
>> - edge ne = single_succ_edge (new_bb);
>> - ne->goto_locus = e->goto_locus;
>> - }
>> +
>> if ((e->flags & (EDGE_ABNORMAL | EDGE_ABNORMAL_CALL))
>> && e->dest != EXIT_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun))
>> need_exit_edge = 1;
>>
>> Assuming the .gcov files from make chec-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=gcov.exp are
>> kept:
>>
>> $ diff -r no-split-edge with-split-edge | grep -C 2 -E "^[<>]\s\s"
>> diff -r sans-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov with-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov
>> 228c228
>> < -: 224: break;
>> ---
>> > 1: 224: break;
>> 231c231
>> < -: 227: break;
>> ---
>> > #####: 227: break;
>> 237c237
>> < -: 233: break;
>> ---
>> > 2: 233: break;
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> OK.
>
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
>>
>> * g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C: Add line count check.
>> * gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c: Likewise.
>> ---
>> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C | 8 ++++----
>> gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c | 4 ++--
>> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
>> index 9018b9a3a73..ee383b480a8 100644
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
>> @@ -257,20 +257,20 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
>> switch (i) /* count(5) */
>> /* branch(end) */
>> {
>> - case 1:
>> + case 1: /* count(1) */
>> result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
>> - break;
>> + break; /* count(1) */
>> case 2:
>> result = do_something (1024);
>> break;
>> - case 3:
>> + case 3: /* count(3) */
>> case 4:
>> /* branch(67) */
>> if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
>> /* branch(end) */
>> return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
>> result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
>> - break;
>> + break; /* count(2) */
>> default:
>> result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
>> switch_m++; /* count(1) */
>> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
>> index 9d8ab1c1097..498d299b66b 100644
>> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
>> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
>> @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
>> {
>> case 1:
>> result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
>> - break;
>> + break; /* count(1) */
>> case 2:
>> result = do_something (1024);
>> break;
>> @@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
>> if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
>> return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
>> result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
>> - break;
>> + break; /* count(2) */
>> default:
>> result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
>> switch_m++; /* count(1) */
>> --
>> 2.34.0
>>
Thank you, I've installed the patches.
I noticed that the inclusion of diffs in the message works fine with git
generally, but could be picked up on by git format-patch && git am < patch. I
hope that does not end up causing too many problems (last time, promise!)
Thanks,
Jørgen
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 0/2] gcov: Split when edge locus differ from dest bb
@ 2022-10-05 12:04 Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-05 12:04 ` [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Jørgen Kvalsvik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jørgen Kvalsvik @ 2022-10-05 12:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Jørgen Kvalsvik
Original discussion: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/2022-October/239544.html
Some tiny test additions as well as more accurate check for when to
split edges for coverage. This patch preserves the edge splitting
heuristic except using a slightly more precise comparison, but makes a
huge difference for the condition profiling [1].
I compared the .gcov files for the gcc and g++ testsuites with and
without this patch and found no differences, and bootstrapped on
x86_64-linux.
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-July/598165.html
Jørgen Kvalsvik (2):
gcov: test switch/break line counts
Split edge when edge locus and dest don't match
gcc/profile.cc | 18 +++++++++---------
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C | 8 ++++----
gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c | 4 ++--
3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts
2022-10-05 12:04 [PATCH 0/2] gcov: Split when edge locus differ from dest bb Jørgen Kvalsvik
@ 2022-10-05 12:04 ` Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-05 12:27 ` Martin Liška
0 siblings, 1 reply; 10+ messages in thread
From: Jørgen Kvalsvik @ 2022-10-05 12:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-patches; +Cc: Jørgen Kvalsvik
The coverage support will under some conditions decide to split edges to
accurately report coverage. By running the test suite with/without this
edge splitting a small diff shows up, addressed by this patch, which
should catch future regressions.
Removing the edge splitting:
diff --git a/gcc/profile.cc b/gcc/profile.cc
--- a/gcc/profile.cc
+++ b/gcc/profile.cc
@@ -1244,19 +1244,7 @@ branch_prob (bool thunk)
Don't do that when the locuses match, so
if (blah) goto something;
is not computed twice. */
- if (last
- && gimple_has_location (last)
- && !RESERVED_LOCATION_P (e->goto_locus)
- && !single_succ_p (bb)
- && (LOCATION_FILE (e->goto_locus)
- != LOCATION_FILE (gimple_location (last))
- || (LOCATION_LINE (e->goto_locus)
- != LOCATION_LINE (gimple_location (last)))))
- {
- basic_block new_bb = split_edge (e);
- edge ne = single_succ_edge (new_bb);
- ne->goto_locus = e->goto_locus;
- }
+
if ((e->flags & (EDGE_ABNORMAL | EDGE_ABNORMAL_CALL))
&& e->dest != EXIT_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun))
need_exit_edge = 1;
Assuming the .gcov files from make chec-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=gcov.exp are
kept:
$ diff -r no-split-edge with-split-edge | grep -C 2 -E "^[<>]\s\s"
diff -r sans-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov with-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov
228c228
< -: 224: break;
---
> 1: 224: break;
231c231
< -: 227: break;
---
> #####: 227: break;
237c237
< -: 233: break;
---
> 2: 233: break;
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C: Add line count check.
* gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c: Likewise.
---
gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C | 8 ++++----
gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c | 4 ++--
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
index 9018b9a3a73..ee383b480a8 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
@@ -257,20 +257,20 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
switch (i) /* count(5) */
/* branch(end) */
{
- case 1:
+ case 1: /* count(1) */
result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
- break;
+ break; /* count(1) */
case 2:
result = do_something (1024);
break;
- case 3:
+ case 3: /* count(3) */
case 4:
/* branch(67) */
if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
/* branch(end) */
return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
- break;
+ break; /* count(2) */
default:
result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
switch_m++; /* count(1) */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
index 9d8ab1c1097..498d299b66b 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
@@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
{
case 1:
result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
- break;
+ break; /* count(1) */
case 2:
result = do_something (1024);
break;
@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
- break;
+ break; /* count(2) */
default:
result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
switch_m++; /* count(1) */
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts
2022-10-05 12:04 ` [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Jørgen Kvalsvik
@ 2022-10-05 12:27 ` Martin Liška
0 siblings, 0 replies; 10+ messages in thread
From: Martin Liška @ 2022-10-05 12:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jørgen Kvalsvik, gcc-patches
On 10/5/22 14:04, Jørgen Kvalsvik via Gcc-patches wrote:
> The coverage support will under some conditions decide to split edges to
> accurately report coverage. By running the test suite with/without this
> edge splitting a small diff shows up, addressed by this patch, which
> should catch future regressions.
Thanks for the patch, it's OK (please apply it).
Martin
>
> Removing the edge splitting:
>
> diff --git a/gcc/profile.cc b/gcc/profile.cc
> --- a/gcc/profile.cc
> +++ b/gcc/profile.cc
> @@ -1244,19 +1244,7 @@ branch_prob (bool thunk)
> Don't do that when the locuses match, so
> if (blah) goto something;
> is not computed twice. */
> - if (last
> - && gimple_has_location (last)
> - && !RESERVED_LOCATION_P (e->goto_locus)
> - && !single_succ_p (bb)
> - && (LOCATION_FILE (e->goto_locus)
> - != LOCATION_FILE (gimple_location (last))
> - || (LOCATION_LINE (e->goto_locus)
> - != LOCATION_LINE (gimple_location (last)))))
> - {
> - basic_block new_bb = split_edge (e);
> - edge ne = single_succ_edge (new_bb);
> - ne->goto_locus = e->goto_locus;
> - }
> +
> if ((e->flags & (EDGE_ABNORMAL | EDGE_ABNORMAL_CALL))
> && e->dest != EXIT_BLOCK_PTR_FOR_FN (cfun))
> need_exit_edge = 1;
>
> Assuming the .gcov files from make chec-gcc RUNTESTFLAGS=gcov.exp are
> kept:
>
> $ diff -r no-split-edge with-split-edge | grep -C 2 -E "^[<>]\s\s"
> diff -r sans-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov with-split-edge/gcc/gcov-4.c.gcov
> 228c228
> < -: 224: break;
> ---
> > 1: 224: break;
> 231c231
> < -: 227: break;
> ---
> > #####: 227: break;
> 237c237
> < -: 233: break;
> ---
> > 2: 233: break;
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>
> * g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C: Add line count check.
> * gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c: Likewise.
> ---
> gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C | 8 ++++----
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c | 4 ++--
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
> index 9018b9a3a73..ee383b480a8 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/g++.dg/gcov/gcov-1.C
> @@ -257,20 +257,20 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
> switch (i) /* count(5) */
> /* branch(end) */
> {
> - case 1:
> + case 1: /* count(1) */
> result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
> - break;
> + break; /* count(1) */
> case 2:
> result = do_something (1024);
> break;
> - case 3:
> + case 3: /* count(3) */
> case 4:
> /* branch(67) */
> if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
> /* branch(end) */
> return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
> result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
> - break;
> + break; /* count(2) */
> default:
> result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
> switch_m++; /* count(1) */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> index 9d8ab1c1097..498d299b66b 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.misc-tests/gcov-4.c
> @@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
> {
> case 1:
> result = do_something (2); /* count(1) */
> - break;
> + break; /* count(1) */
> case 2:
> result = do_something (1024);
> break;
> @@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ test_switch (int i, int j)
> if (j == 2) /* count(3) */
> return do_something (4); /* count(1) */
> result = do_something (8); /* count(2) */
> - break;
> + break; /* count(2) */
> default:
> result = do_something (32); /* count(1) */
> switch_m++; /* count(1) */
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 10+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-10-14 10:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-10-11 12:43 [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-11 12:43 ` [PATCH 2/2] gcov: test line count for label in then/else block Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-13 11:40 ` Richard Biener
2022-10-11 13:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Michael Matz
2022-10-11 13:57 ` Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-11 14:00 ` Michael Matz
2022-10-13 11:39 ` Richard Biener
2022-10-14 10:09 ` Jørgen Kvalsvik
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-10-05 12:04 [PATCH 0/2] gcov: Split when edge locus differ from dest bb Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-05 12:04 ` [PATCH 1/2] gcov: test switch/break line counts Jørgen Kvalsvik
2022-10-05 12:27 ` Martin Liška
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).