[PATCH] D158668: RFC: Add getLikelyBranchWeight helper function

wenlei added a comment. In D158668#4611988 , @MatzeB wrote: > And as another strawman / discussion-starter I put up D158680 > where I use `!{"branch_weights", i32 1, > i32 0}` to represent likely branches and the

[PATCH] D158668: RFC: Add getLikelyBranchWeight helper function

MatzeB added a comment. I have a feeling @mtrofin would prefer pass-specific weights rather than a unified notion of "likely"/"unlikely"... So with the latest round of patches it's probably best to abandon this for now. Repository: rG LLVM Github Monorepo CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION

[PATCH] D158668: RFC: Add getLikelyBranchWeight helper function

MatzeB added a comment. > I'd also posit, that maybe since we're changing this we should reevaluate the > numbers we use as defaults. Heh, same here. Internally we have a handful of functions that end up using `[[likely]]` loop conditions in a triple-nested loops leading to the estimated

[PATCH] D158668: RFC: Add getLikelyBranchWeight helper function

paulkirth added a comment. In D158668#4611842 , @MatzeB wrote: >> My initial reaction to this was that we should keep the >> --unlikely-branch-weights flag available > > I don't feel strongly about it and can put it back. But can you give some >