Hi.

In non-LTO mode, we should not set hotness according to computed histogram
in ipa-profile. Following patch does that and fixes the test-case isolated
from PR.

Patch survives regression tests on x86_64-linux-gnu.
Ready for trunk?
Thanks,
Martin

gcc/ChangeLog:

2018-10-09  Martin Liska  <mli...@suse.cz>

        PR gcov-profile/77698
        * ipa-profile.c (ipa_profile): Adjust hotness threshold
        only in LTO mode.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

2018-10-09  Martin Liska  <mli...@suse.cz>

        PR gcov-profile/77698
        * gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr77698.c: New test.
---
 gcc/ipa-profile.c                        |  5 ++---
 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr77698.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr77698.c


diff --git a/gcc/ipa-profile.c b/gcc/ipa-profile.c
index c74f4a4a41d..7065af59ba9 100644
--- a/gcc/ipa-profile.c
+++ b/gcc/ipa-profile.c
@@ -533,11 +533,10 @@ ipa_profile (void)
 		   cumulated_size * 100.0 / overall_size);
 	}
 
-      if (threshold > get_hot_bb_threshold ()
-	  || in_lto_p)
+      if (in_lto_p)
 	{
 	  if (dump_file)
-	    fprintf (dump_file, "Threshold updated.\n");
+	    fprintf (dump_file, "Setting hotness threshold in LTO mode.\n");
           set_hot_bb_threshold (threshold);
 	}
     }
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr77698.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr77698.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..201bfc7ee20
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/tree-prof/pr77698.c
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -fno-tree-vectorize -funroll-loops --param max-unroll-times=4 -fno-inline -fdump-rtl-alignments" } */
+
+volatile long int g;
+volatile long int j = 0;
+
+void foo(long int *a, long int *b, long int n)
+{
+  long int i;
+
+  for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
+    a[j] = *b;
+}
+
+long int a, b;
+int main()
+{
+  a = 1; b = 2;
+  foo(&a, &b, 1000000);
+  g = a+b;
+  return 0;
+}
+
+/* { dg-final-use-not-autofdo { scan-rtl-dump-times "internal loop alignment added" 1 "alignments"} } */

Reply via email to