> > > > III. > > > > I've written this patch to check for the missing probability more > > consistently. I'm not certain if we can require that the probability > > should always be set, so I'm just requiring that if it is set on one > > outgoing edge, it needs to be set on all outgoing edges. > > > > Sofar I've build a c-only x86_64 non-bootstrap compiler and ran dg.exp. > > The only problem I ran into was in attr-simd{,-2,-4}.c. I've written a > > tentative patch for that, and will submit it as follow-up. > > > > Is this check a good idea? > I think the additional checking is a good idea. Ideally we'd verify > that all edges have a probability. Until then I think you need some > kind of rationale in a comment for why the checking is limited. > > > > > OK for trunk if bootstrap and reg-test on x86_64 succeeds? > Yea, but I'd like to see ongoing work towards full checking.
I have full checking in my tree for some time. At x86-64 bootstrap there is one remaining offender in simd_clone_adjust which was not fixed yet https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00219.html Jakub did not tell me what would be a reasonable guess :) After that I plan to enable full checking after checking arm/ppc. So I hope we will converge to full checking really soon. But having additional check is fine. Honza > > Jeff