Hi Jeff, I revived profile_merger tool in http://github.com/google/autofdo and re-worked the patch to merge profiles for compiling the libraries.
Please take a look at the attached patch. Thanks, Eugene -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Law <jeffreya...@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2022 10:16 PM To: Eugene Rozenfeld <eugene.rozenf...@microsoft.com>; gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Andi Kleen <a...@linux.intel.com> Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH] Fix autoprofiledbootstrap build [You don't often get email from jeffreya...@gmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] On 11/22/22 14:20, Eugene Rozenfeld wrote: > I took another look at this. We actually collect perf data when building the > libraries. So, we have ./prev-gcc/perf.data, ./prev-libcpp/perf.data, > ./prev-libiberty/perf.data, etc. But when creating gcov data for > -fauto-profile build of cc1plus or cc1 we only use ./prev-gcc/perf.data . So, > a better solution would be either having a single perf.data for all builds > (gcc and libraries) or merging perf.data files before attempting > autostagefeedback. What would you recommend? ISTM that if neither approach loses data, then they're functionally equivalent -- meaning that we can select whichever is easier to wire into our build system. A single perf.data might serialize the build. So perhaps separate, then merge right before autostagefeedback. But I'm willing to go with whatever you think is best. Jeff
0001-Fix-autoprofiledbootstrap-build.patch
Description: 0001-Fix-autoprofiledbootstrap-build.patch
