On 2012-11-13 5:03 PM, Justin Dolske wrote:
On 11/13/12 4:34 PM, Ehsan Akhgari wrote:
But the point here is that unless we know for sure that we're dealing
with a compiler bug, disabling Linux PGO builds may just wallpaper over
the problem.
That's quite possible, and I'm sure there are other currently-used ways
to exercise the code that could expose other lurking issues. The
standard can't be perfection. So disabling PGO sounds like it can be a
reasonable tradeoff to have more time to focus on other bugs that
matter. Especially given that distros are not shipping PGO builds, and
so to a certain degree we're just making work for ourselves here.
Alternatively: It's a zero-sum game. We need to be smart about about
where we focus resources, and there seems to be a pretty compelling
claim (IMO, and I've no skin in it :) that Linux PGO is a poor
cost/benefit.
Let me try to be more clear. Assuming that the assertion that the bug
in question is not caused by the PGO compiler miscompiling, turning off
PGO in order to move on would be the wrong thing to do. If it's only
affecting a single test, then that test should be disabled. Now, we
don't know whether that assumption is correct or not, as far as I can
tell from reading the bug.
Cheers,
Ehsan
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
