public inbox for
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eugene Rozenfeld <>
To: Jeff Law <>,
	"" <>,
	Andi Kleen <>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] Fix autoprofiledbootstrap build
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 20:36:16 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

Ping for



-----Original Message-----
From: Eugene Rozenfeld 
Sent: Tuesday, March 14, 2023 2:21 PM
To: Jeff Law <>;; Andi Kleen <>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] Fix autoprofiledbootstrap build

Hi Jeff,

I revived profile_merger tool in and re-worked the patch to merge profiles for compiling the libraries.

Please take a look at the attached patch.



-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Law <> 
Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 10:16 PM
To: Eugene Rozenfeld <>;; Andi Kleen <>
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] Fix autoprofiledbootstrap build

[You don't often get email from Learn why this is important at ]

On 11/22/22 14:20, Eugene Rozenfeld wrote:
> I took another look at this. We actually collect perf data when building the libraries. So, we have ./prev-gcc/, ./prev-libcpp/, ./prev-libiberty/, etc. But when creating gcov data for  -fauto-profile build of cc1plus or cc1 we only use ./prev-gcc/ . So, a better solution would be either having a single for all builds (gcc and libraries) or merging files before attempting autostagefeedback. What would you recommend?

ISTM that if neither approach loses data, then they're functionally equivalent -- meaning that we can select whichever is easier to wire into our build system.

A single might serialize the build.  So perhaps separate, then merge right before autostagefeedback.

But I'm willing to go with whatever you think is best.


  reply	other threads:[~2023-03-27 20:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-21 21:57 Eugene Rozenfeld
2022-11-22 20:01 ` Jeff Law
2022-11-22 21:20   ` [EXTERNAL] " Eugene Rozenfeld
2022-11-23  6:15     ` Jeff Law
2023-03-14 21:21       ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2023-03-27 20:36         ` Eugene Rozenfeld [this message]
2023-04-18 19:02         ` Jeff Law

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:

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

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* 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).