From: Jiufu Guo <guojiufu@linux.ibm.com>
To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
Cc: Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>, Pat Haugen <pthaugen@linux.ibm.com>,
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, wschmidt@linux.ibm.com,
segher@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] correct COUNT and PROB for unrolled loop
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2020 02:29:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <h4836bhg8kk.fsf@genoa.aus.stglabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200203162337.GK22868@kam.mff.cuni.cz> (Jan Hubicka's message of "Mon, 3 Feb 2020 17:23:37 +0100")
Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> writes:
>> On Mon, 2020-02-03 at 10:04 -0600, Pat Haugen wrote:
>> > On 2/3/20 2:17 AM, Jiufu Guo wrote:
>> > > +/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump-times "REG_BR_PROB 937042044" 1 "loop2_unroll"} } */
>> >
>> > Sorry I didn't catch this addition to the original testcase
>> > earlier, but I wonder how stable this test is going to be. If
>> > there are future changes to default count/probability, or changes
>> > in their representation, this may fail and need to be updated. The
>> > fact that the loop is still getting aligned is the main concern.
>> Unless you're really interested in those probabilities, I'd suggest not
>> testing for them. If you really need to test for them, then I'd
>> suggest testing for them being "close" rather than a specific value for
>> REG_BR_PROB.
>
> Note that REG_BR_PROB now encodes the actual probability as well as the
> profile quality (i.e. it is m_val * 8 + m_quality).
> We may want to invent better way to dump them, but it is better to match
> for CFG edge probability rather than the REG_BR_PROB_NOTE.
Thanks Honza, Pat, Jeff.
String like "count 661119332" in dump file may also not perfect.
I would removing this line before commit.
Welcome for any other comments!
Thanks,
Jiufu Guo.
>
> honza
>>
>> jeff
>>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-11 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-03 8:17 Jiufu Guo
2020-02-03 16:04 ` Pat Haugen
2020-02-03 16:20 ` Jeff Law
2020-02-03 16:23 ` Jan Hubicka
2020-02-11 2:29 ` Jiufu Guo [this message]
2020-02-17 6:23 ` [PATCH V2] " Jiufu Guo
2020-02-28 7:56 ` Jiufu Guo
2020-03-19 2:21 ` Jiufu Guo
2020-05-19 6:15 ` Jiufu Guo
2020-06-03 5:22 ` [PATCH V2] PING^ " Jiufu Guo
2020-06-18 1:22 ` [PATCH V2] PING^2 " Jiufu Guo
2020-07-02 2:35 ` Jiufu Guo
2020-07-09 11:55 ` Martin Liška
2020-07-10 2:14 ` Jiufu Guo
2020-07-10 7:37 ` Martin Liška
2020-07-10 13:09 ` Jiufu Guo
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=h4836bhg8kk.fsf@genoa.aus.stglabs.ibm.com \
--to=guojiufu@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hubicka@ucw.cz \
--cc=law@redhat.com \
--cc=pthaugen@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=wschmidt@linux.ibm.com \
/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).