On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Bill Schmidt writes:
>>
>> My reason for asking involves a large heavily-threaded application that
>> is improved by feedback-directed optimization on some platforms, but not
>> on others. One theory is that a defective profile is generated du
Bill Schmidt writes:
>
> My reason for asking involves a large heavily-threaded application that
> is improved by feedback-directed optimization on some platforms, but not
> on others. One theory is that a defective profile is generated due to
> counter dropouts from contention. I'm somewhat ske
On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 13:13 -0700, Xinliang David Li wrote:
> There is a similar patch (in google branches) from Rong Xu which
> enables atomic profile counter update.
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00072.html
Thanks, David! We'll take a look.
>
> On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:5
There is a similar patch (in google branches) from Rong Xu which
enables atomic profile counter update.
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-01/msg00072.html
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Bill Schmidt
wrote:
> Six years ago, Michael Matz proposed a patch for generating profile
> instrument
Six years ago, Michael Matz proposed a patch for generating profile
instrumentation in a thread-safe manner:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2007-03/msg00950.html
Reading through the thread, I saw a few minor objections, but nothing to
indicate the patch should be withdrawn. However, apparentl
