Re: Ping: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

Hi Honza and All, After more checks, I'm thinking these patches may still be useful. For patch 1: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html This patch recalculates the loop's BB-count and could correct some BB-count mismatch for loops which has a single exit. From the t

Re: Ping: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

On 2021-06-15 12:57, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: On 2021-06-14 17:16, Jan Hubicka wrote: On 5/6/2021 8:36 PM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: > Gentle ping. > > Original message: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html I think you need a more aggressive ping  :

Re: Ping: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

On 2021-06-15 12:57, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: On 2021-06-14 17:16, Jan Hubicka wrote: On 5/6/2021 8:36 PM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: > Gentle ping. > > Original message: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html I think you need a more aggressive ping  :

Re: Ping: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

On 2021-06-14 17:16, Jan Hubicka wrote: On 5/6/2021 8:36 PM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: > Gentle ping. > > Original message: > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html I think you need a more aggressive ping  :-) OK for the trunk.  Sorry for the long delay.  I ke

Re: Ping: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

> > > On 5/6/2021 8:36 PM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: > > Gentle ping. > > > > Original message: > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html > I think you need a more aggressive ping  :-) > > OK for the trunk.  Sorry for the long delay.  I kept hoping someone els

Re: Ping: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

On 5/6/2021 8:36 PM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: Gentle ping. Original message: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html I think you need a more aggressive ping  :-) OK for the trunk.  Sorry for the long delay.  I kept hoping someone else would step in and lo

Re: Ping^2: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

Gentle ping ;) BR. Jiufu Guo On 2021-05-20 15:19, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: Gentle ping^. On 2021-05-07 10:36, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: Gentle ping. Original message: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html Thanks, Jiufu Guo.

Ping^1: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

Gentle ping^. On 2021-05-07 10:36, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: Gentle ping. Original message: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html Thanks, Jiufu Guo.

Ping: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

Gentle ping. Original message: https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-October/555871.html Thanks, Jiufu Guo.

Re: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

On 12/4/20 7:17 AM, Jiufu Guo via Gcc-patches wrote: Oh, this may be indicate 'approval with comments', right?:) Yes, Honza can you please review the patch? Thanks, Martin

Re: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

Jiufu Guo writes: > Jiufu Guo writes: > >> Jeff Law writes: >> >>> On 11/18/20 12:28 AM, Richard Biener wrote: On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Jeff Law wrote: > Minor questions for Jan and Richi embedded below... > > On 10/9/20 4:12 AM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: >> When inv

Re: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

Jiufu Guo writes: > Jeff Law writes: > >> On 11/18/20 12:28 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >>> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Jeff Law wrote: >>> Minor questions for Jan and Richi embedded below... On 10/9/20 4:12 AM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: > When investigating the issue from >

Re: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

Jeff Law writes: > On 11/18/20 12:28 AM, Richard Biener wrote: >> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Jeff Law wrote: >> >>> Minor questions for Jan and Richi embedded below... >>> >>> On 10/9/20 4:12 AM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: When investigating the issue from https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/

Re: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

On 11/18/20 12:28 AM, Richard Biener wrote: > On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Jeff Law wrote: > >> Minor questions for Jan and Richi embedded below... >> >> On 10/9/20 4:12 AM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: >>> When investigating the issue from >>> https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549

Re: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

On Tue, 17 Nov 2020, Jeff Law wrote: > > Minor questions for Jan and Richi embedded below... > > On 10/9/20 4:12 AM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: > > When investigating the issue from > > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549786.html > > I find the BB COUNTs of loop seems a

Re: [PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

Minor questions for Jan and Richi embedded below... On 10/9/20 4:12 AM, guojiufu via Gcc-patches wrote: > When investigating the issue from > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549786.html > I find the BB COUNTs of loop seems are not accurate in some case. > For example: > > In

[PATCH 1/2] correct BB frequencies after loop changed

When investigating the issue from https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2020-July/549786.html I find the BB COUNTs of loop seems are not accurate in some case. For example: In below figure: COUNT:268435456 pre-header | | .