On Thu, 18 Sep 2025 09:03:17 -0700 Bart Van Assche <bvanass...@acm.org> wrote:
> On 9/18/25 8:58 AM, Ian Rogers wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 7:05 AM Marco Elver <el...@google.com> wrote: > >> +config WARN_CAPABILITY_ANALYSIS > >> + bool "Compiler capability-analysis warnings" > >> + depends on CC_IS_CLANG && CLANG_VERSION >= 220000 > >> + # Branch profiling re-defines "if", which messes with the > >> compiler's > >> + # ability to analyze __cond_acquires(..), resulting in false > >> positives. > >> + depends on !TRACE_BRANCH_PROFILING > > > > Err, wow! What and huh, and why? Crikes. I'm amazed you found such an > > option exists. I must be very naive to have never heard of it and now > > I wonder if it is needed and load bearing? > > (+Steven) > > This is an old option. I think this commit introduced it: > > commit 52f232cb720a7babb752849cbc2cab2d24021209 > Author: Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> > Date: Wed Nov 12 00:14:40 2008 -0500 > > tracing: likely/unlikely branch annotation tracer > I still use it every year (enable it during December for a few weeks on my workstation and server) and post the results publicly. When I get time, I try to fix (add / remove) likely/unlikely statements. Unfortunately, I haven't had time to look deeper at them. https://rostedt.org/branches/current/ This year I missed December and ended up running it in January instead. -- Steve
