> >
> > III.
> >
> > I've written this patch to check for the missing probability more
> > consistently. I'm not certain if we can require that the probability
> > should always be set, so I'm just requiring that if it is set on one
> > outgoing edge, it needs to be set on all outgoing edges.
> >
> > Sofar I've build a c-only x86_64 non-bootstrap compiler and ran dg.exp.
> > The only problem I ran into was in attr-simd{,-2,-4}.c. I've written a
> > tentative patch for that, and will submit it as follow-up.
> >
> > Is this check a good idea?
> I think the additional checking is a good idea. Ideally we'd verify
> that all edges have a probability. Until then I think you need some
> kind of rationale in a comment for why the checking is limited.
>
> >
> > OK for trunk if bootstrap and reg-test on x86_64 succeeds?
> Yea, but I'd like to see ongoing work towards full checking.
I have full checking in my tree for some time. At x86-64 bootstrap there
is one remaining offender in simd_clone_adjust which was not fixed yet
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-07/msg00219.html
Jakub did not tell me what would be a reasonable guess :)
After that I plan to enable full checking after checking arm/ppc.
So I hope we will converge to full checking really soon. But having
additional check is fine.
Honza
>
> Jeff
