================
@@ -414,6 +417,58 @@ void removeInstrumentation(Function &F) {
I.eraseFromParent();
}
+void annotateIndirectCall(
+ Module &M, CallBase &CB,
+ const DenseMap<uint32_t, FlatIndirectTargets> &FlatProf,
+ const InstrProfCallsite &Ins) {
+ auto Idx = Ins.getIndex()->getZExtValue();
+ auto FIt = FlatProf.find(Idx);
+ if (FIt == FlatProf.end())
+ return;
+ const auto &Targets = FIt->second;
+ SmallVector<InstrProfValueData, 2> Data;
+ uint64_t Sum = 0;
+ for (auto &[Guid, Count] : Targets) {
+ Data.push_back({/*.Value=*/Guid, /*.Count=*/Count});
+ Sum += Count;
+ }
+ struct InstrProfValueDataGTComparer {
+ bool operator()(const InstrProfValueData &A, const InstrProfValueData &B) {
+ return A.Count > B.Count;
+ }
+ };
+ llvm::sort(Data, InstrProfValueDataGTComparer());
+ llvm::annotateValueSite(M, CB, Data, Sum,
+ InstrProfValueKind::IPVK_IndirectCallTarget,
+ Data.size());
+ LLVM_DEBUG(dbgs() << "[ctxprof] flat indirect call prof: " << CB
+ << CB.getMetadata(LLVMContext::MD_prof) << "\n");
+}
+
+// We normally return a "Changed" bool, but the calling pass' run assumes
+// something will change - some profile will be added - so this won't add much
+// by returning false when applicable.
+void annotateIndCalls(Module &M, const CtxProfAnalysis::Result &CtxProf) {
----------------
snehasish wrote:
nit: s/Ind/Indirect/ to be consistent with the other method?
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/134766
_______________________________________________
llvm-branch-commits mailing list
llvm-branch-commits@lists.llvm.org
https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-branch-commits
