From: Bernd Schmidt <bschmidt@redhat.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>,
Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/9] Separate shrink-wrapping
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2016 11:00:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3e28bade-fba4-a44e-c7a5-e96e489ee13c@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160909205607.GD21356@gate.crashing.org>
On 09/09/2016 10:56 PM, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 09, 2016 at 12:57:32PM -0600, Jeff Law wrote:
>> I think the lack of test coverage is something we'll want to address.
>
> Building and running the compiler, the various target libraries, and the
> testsuite is more than enough coverage for correctness in my opinion --
I'd argue against that:
- a lot of compiler bugs for passes like this show up only for unusual
CFGs that you don't really get with normal input code.
- separate shrink wrapping explicitly tries to modify infrequent
paths, which may not even get exercised.
Also, unless I've missed it you've not provided any numbers about how
often this triggers, let's say on a cc1 build.
For these reasons I thought having self-tests would be a good idea, but
I was informed it's a waste of time, so I guess not.
Bernd
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-12 10:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 73+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-01 1:43 Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-01 1:43 ` [PATCH 3/9] dce: Don't dead-code delete separately wrapped restores Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 17:52 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 15:59 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 16:39 ` Jeff Law
2016-08-01 1:43 ` [PATCH 1/9] separate shrink-wrap: New command-line flag, status flag, hooks, and doc Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-29 9:31 ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-08-29 14:30 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 17:37 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 11:03 ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-09-09 15:13 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 18:31 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 20:41 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-12 16:49 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 15:51 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 15:40 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 16:58 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-08 17:48 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 15:44 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-01 1:43 ` [PATCH 2/9] cfgcleanup: Don't confuse CFI when -fshrink-wrap-separate Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 17:51 ` Jeff Law
2016-08-01 1:57 ` [PATCH 9/9] rs6000: Separate shrink-wrapping Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-01 1:57 ` [PATCH 8/9] shrink-wrap: shrink-wrapping for separate components Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 19:03 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 22:03 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-12 18:21 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-14 13:45 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-15 16:47 ` Jeff Law
2016-08-01 1:57 ` [PATCH 4/9] regrename: Don't rename restores Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 17:54 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 21:05 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-12 17:01 ` Jeff Law
2016-08-01 1:57 ` [PATCH 7/9] cprop: Leave RTX_FRAME_RELATED_P instructions alone Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 18:34 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 21:21 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-01 2:12 ` [PATCH 6/9] sel-sched: Don't mess with register restores Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-04 7:33 ` Andrey Belevantsev
2016-09-08 17:55 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 21:13 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-12 17:39 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-14 13:28 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-01 2:12 ` [PATCH 5/9] regrename: Don't run if function was separately shrink-wrapped Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 17:54 ` Jeff Law
2016-08-04 0:05 ` [PATCH v2 0/9] Separate shrink-wrapping Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-24 16:04 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-26 13:03 ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-08-26 13:48 ` David Malcolm
2016-08-26 13:55 ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-08-26 14:50 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-08-26 15:03 ` Bernd Schmidt
2016-08-26 16:27 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 16:58 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 15:26 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 16:26 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 16:51 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 17:22 ` Jeff Law
2016-08-30 12:31 ` Michael Matz
2016-09-08 16:41 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 6:31 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 15:28 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 15:43 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 18:25 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 20:29 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-08 17:20 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 15:33 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 16:49 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 17:00 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-09 17:44 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 19:36 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-09 21:00 ` Segher Boessenkool
2016-09-12 11:00 ` Bernd Schmidt [this message]
2016-09-12 16:59 ` Jeff Law
2016-09-14 13:22 ` Segher Boessenkool
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=3e28bade-fba4-a44e-c7a5-e96e489ee13c@redhat.com \
--to=bschmidt@redhat.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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).