https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
Resolution|---
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
--- Comment #6 from qinzhao at gcc dot gnu.org ---
Author: qinzhao
Date: Wed Sep 26 22:29:54 2018
New Revision: 264657
URL: https://gcc.gnu.org/viewcvs?rev=264657=gcc=rev
Log:
2018-09-26 Indu Bhagat
PR gcov-profile/86957
*
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
--- Comment #5 from Indu Bhagat ---
Proposed patch https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg00367.html
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
--- Comment #4 from Martin Liška ---
Agree that we should provide that information to user. Question is whether we
want to present it as a note (of a warning) or use new dump_printf_loc
machinery?
I can Indu help with that if needed?
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
--- Comment #3 from Indu Bhagat ---
Currently, GCC dumps some information in the dump files regarding functions not
being executed in the training run (And, I agree its not satisfactorily
direct).
First, in the "Symbol table:" dump section in
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener ---
I wonder if for assessing the quality of a profile it is somehow possible to
dump
all functions that got never executed during training? Because all those
functions will be optimized as cold by GCC AFAIK.
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=86957
Martin Liška changed:
What|Removed |Added
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
Last reconfirmed|
