On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 04:15:20PM +0800, Bin.Cheng wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 4:07 PM Andi Kleen <a...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > Bin Cheng, > > > > I did some testing on this now. The attached patch automatically increases > > the iterations > > for autofdo profiles. > Hi Andi, thanks very much for tuning these. > > > > But even with even more iterations I still have stable failures in > > > > FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/cold_partition_label.c scan-assembler foo[._]+cold > > FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/cold_partition_label.c scan-assembler size[ > > \ta-zA-Z0-0]+foo[._]+cold > I think these two are supposed to fail with current code base.
We should mark it as XFAIL then I guess. Is it understood why it doesn't work? > > FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/indir-call-prof.c scan-ipa-dump afdo "Indirect call > > -> direct call.* a1 transformation on insn" > I also got unstable pass/fail for indirect call optimization when > tuning iterations, and haven't got an iteration number which passes > all the time. I guess we need to combine decreasing of sampling count > here. Okay I will look into that. Could also try if prime sample after values help, this sometimes fixes problems with systematically missing some code in sampling. > > FAIL: gcc.dg/tree-prof/peel-1.c scan-tree-dump cunroll "Peeled loop ., 1 > > times" > This one should fail too. Same. -Andi
