From: "hongtao.liu" <[email protected]>
> The check you added seems correct to me. Do we need to keep the
> afdo_string_table->get_index (IDENTIFIER_POINTER (
> DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME (edge->callee->decl))) != s->name ()
> check? Should your check replace it rather than be an additional check?
I verified that "replace" generates same binaries as "an additional check".
So update the patch and committed.
Function name in afdo_string_table is step3d_t_tile.
but DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME (edge->callee->decl))) gets
__step3d_t_mod_MOD_step3d_t_tile, Looks like the prefix is not in the
debug string table.
The patch uses
afdo_string_table->get_index_by_decl (edge->callee->decl) instead.
gcc/ChangeLog:
PR gcov-profile/118508
* auto-profile.cc
(autofdo_source_profile::get_callsite_total_count): Fix name
mismatch for fortran.
---
gcc/auto-profile.cc | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/auto-profile.cc b/gcc/auto-profile.cc
index aa4d1634f01..106e4216dda 100644
--- a/gcc/auto-profile.cc
+++ b/gcc/auto-profile.cc
@@ -837,8 +837,8 @@ autofdo_source_profile::get_callsite_total_count (
function_instance *s = get_function_instance_by_inline_stack (stack);
if (s == NULL
- || afdo_string_table->get_index (IDENTIFIER_POINTER (
- DECL_ASSEMBLER_NAME (edge->callee->decl))) != s->name ())
+ ||(afdo_string_table->get_index_by_decl (edge->callee->decl)
+ != s->name()))
return 0;
return s->total_count ();
--
2.34.1
