[Ping] [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
Ping? Hi, Here is the patch, Tested by profiledbootstrap. Ok for google gcc-4.8? thanks, Dinar. profiledbootstrap-fix1.patch Description: Binary data
Re: [Ping] [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
Sorry for the delay. The patch is ok and I have committed it to the google branch. thanks, David On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Dinar Temirbulatov di...@kugelworks.com wrote: Ping? Hi, Here is the patch, Tested by profiledbootstrap. Ok for google gcc-4.8? thanks, Dinar.
Re: [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
Hi, Here is the patch, Tested by profiledbootstrap. Ok for google gcc-4.8? thanks, Dinar. On Wed, Jul 31, 2013 at 12:01 AM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote: Will do. The patch was in gcc-4_7 by Dehao. r194713 | dehao | 2012-12-24 16:49:06 -0800 (Mon, 24 Dec 2012) | 5 lines Fix the profiled bootstrap: 1. Set the default value of gcov-debug to be 0. 2. Merge profile summaries from different instrumented binaries. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: Ok. Rong, can you help commit the parameter default setting patch? thanks, David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote: We have seen the issue before. It does fail the profile boostrap as it reads a wrong gcda file. I thought it had been fixed. (The fix was as David mentioned, setting the default value of the parameter to 0). -Rong On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: I need to understand why this affects profile bootstrap -- is this due to file name conflict? The fix is wrong -- please do not remove the parameter. If it is a problem, a better fix is to change the default parameter value to 0. David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote: cc'ing Rong and David since this came from LIPO support. The patch as-is removes the one use of PARAM_GCOV_DEBUG (which is on by default) without removing the parameter itself. What is the failure mode you see from this code? Thanks, Teresa On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Dinar Temirbulatov di...@kugelworks.com wrote: Hello This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for google 4.8? thanks, Dinar. -- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413 profiledbootstrap-fix1.patch Description: Binary data
[Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
Hello This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for google 4.8? thanks, Dinar. profiledbootstrap-fix.patch Description: Binary data
Re: [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
cc'ing Rong and David since this came from LIPO support. The patch as-is removes the one use of PARAM_GCOV_DEBUG (which is on by default) without removing the parameter itself. What is the failure mode you see from this code? Thanks, Teresa On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Dinar Temirbulatov di...@kugelworks.com wrote: Hello This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for google 4.8? thanks, Dinar. -- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
Re: [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
I need to understand why this affects profile bootstrap -- is this due to file name conflict? The fix is wrong -- please do not remove the parameter. If it is a problem, a better fix is to change the default parameter value to 0. David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote: cc'ing Rong and David since this came from LIPO support. The patch as-is removes the one use of PARAM_GCOV_DEBUG (which is on by default) without removing the parameter itself. What is the failure mode you see from this code? Thanks, Teresa On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Dinar Temirbulatov di...@kugelworks.com wrote: Hello This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for google 4.8? thanks, Dinar. -- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
Re: [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
We have seen the issue before. It does fail the profile boostrap as it reads a wrong gcda file. I thought it had been fixed. (The fix was as David mentioned, setting the default value of the parameter to 0). -Rong On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: I need to understand why this affects profile bootstrap -- is this due to file name conflict? The fix is wrong -- please do not remove the parameter. If it is a problem, a better fix is to change the default parameter value to 0. David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote: cc'ing Rong and David since this came from LIPO support. The patch as-is removes the one use of PARAM_GCOV_DEBUG (which is on by default) without removing the parameter itself. What is the failure mode you see from this code? Thanks, Teresa On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Dinar Temirbulatov di...@kugelworks.com wrote: Hello This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for google 4.8? thanks, Dinar. -- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
Re: [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
I need to understand why this affects profile bootstrap -- is this due to file name conflict? Yes, It is simple. During the profiledbootstrap on x86_64 platform for libiberty the compiler picks an incorrect profile from the current directory(non-pic version), while compiling pic version, and profiledbootstrap fails. Here is log: if [ x-fpic != x ]; then \ /home/dinar/bugz/x86_64/build-gcc-4_8-svn-orig/./prev-gcc/xgcc -B/home/dinar/bugz/x86_64/bisect/build-gcc-4_8-svn-orig/./prev-gcc/ -B/tmp/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/tmp/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/bin/ -B/tmp/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/lib/ -isystem /tmp/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/include -isystem /tmp/x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/sys-include-c -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -g -O2 -fprofile-use -I. -I../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/../include -W -Wall -Wwrite-strings -Wc++-compat -Wstrict-prototypes -pedantic -fpic ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c -o pic/dwarfnames.o; \ else true; fi yes ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c:75:0: error: the control flow of function ‘get_DW_CFA_name’ does not match its profile data (counter ‘arcs’) [-Werror=coverage-mismatch] ^ ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c:75:0: note: use -Wno-error=coverage-mismatch to tolerate the mismatch but performance may drop if the function is hot ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c: In function ‘get_DW_ATE_name’: ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c:75:0: error: the control flow of function ‘get_DW_ATE_name’ does not match its profile data (counter ‘arcs’) [-Werror=coverage-mismatch] ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c:75:0: note: use -Wno-error=coverage-mismatch to tolerate the mismatch but performance may drop if the function is hot ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c: In function ‘get_DW_OP_name’: ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c:75:0: error: the control flow of function ‘get_DW_OP_name’ does not match its profile data (counter ‘arcs’) [-Werror=coverage-mismatch] ../../gcc-4_8-svn-orig/libiberty/dwarfnames.c:75:0: note: use -Wno-error=coverage-mismatch to tolerate the mismatch but performance may drop if the function is hot thanks, Dinar. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: I need to understand why this affects profile bootstrap -- is this due to file name conflict? The fix is wrong -- please do not remove the parameter. If it is a problem, a better fix is to change the default parameter value to 0. David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote: cc'ing Rong and David since this came from LIPO support. The patch as-is removes the one use of PARAM_GCOV_DEBUG (which is on by default) without removing the parameter itself. What is the failure mode you see from this code? Thanks, Teresa On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Dinar Temirbulatov di...@kugelworks.com wrote: Hello This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for google 4.8? thanks, Dinar. -- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
Re: [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
Ok. Rong, can you help commit the parameter default setting patch? thanks, David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote: We have seen the issue before. It does fail the profile boostrap as it reads a wrong gcda file. I thought it had been fixed. (The fix was as David mentioned, setting the default value of the parameter to 0). -Rong On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: I need to understand why this affects profile bootstrap -- is this due to file name conflict? The fix is wrong -- please do not remove the parameter. If it is a problem, a better fix is to change the default parameter value to 0. David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote: cc'ing Rong and David since this came from LIPO support. The patch as-is removes the one use of PARAM_GCOV_DEBUG (which is on by default) without removing the parameter itself. What is the failure mode you see from this code? Thanks, Teresa On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Dinar Temirbulatov di...@kugelworks.com wrote: Hello This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for google 4.8? thanks, Dinar. -- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
Re: [Google] Fix profiledbootstrap failure
Will do. The patch was in gcc-4_7 by Dehao. r194713 | dehao | 2012-12-24 16:49:06 -0800 (Mon, 24 Dec 2012) | 5 lines Fix the profiled bootstrap: 1. Set the default value of gcov-debug to be 0. 2. Merge profile summaries from different instrumented binaries. On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: Ok. Rong, can you help commit the parameter default setting patch? thanks, David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:48 PM, Rong Xu x...@google.com wrote: We have seen the issue before. It does fail the profile boostrap as it reads a wrong gcda file. I thought it had been fixed. (The fix was as David mentioned, setting the default value of the parameter to 0). -Rong On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Xinliang David Li davi...@google.com wrote: I need to understand why this affects profile bootstrap -- is this due to file name conflict? The fix is wrong -- please do not remove the parameter. If it is a problem, a better fix is to change the default parameter value to 0. David On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Teresa Johnson tejohn...@google.com wrote: cc'ing Rong and David since this came from LIPO support. The patch as-is removes the one use of PARAM_GCOV_DEBUG (which is on by default) without removing the parameter itself. What is the failure mode you see from this code? Thanks, Teresa On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:50 AM, Dinar Temirbulatov di...@kugelworks.com wrote: Hello This change allows to complete profiledbootstrap on the google gcc-4.8 branch, tested with make bootstrap with no new regressions. OK for google 4.8? thanks, Dinar. -- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohn...@google.com | 408-460-2413
