> Do you mean adjusting bb->count? Because in > expand_call_inline(tree-inline.c), it will use bb->count to pass into > copy_body to calculate count_scale.
What about taking here callee->count instead? For inline nodes without any capping hack, bb->count == edge->count = callee->count. When profile ends up being obviously inconsistent, I would say that inliner can cap callee->count during producing the clone... Honza > > Thanks, > Dehao > > On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Jan Hubicka <hubi...@ucw.cz> wrote: > >> In AutoFDO, a basic block's count can be much larger than it's actual > >> count because debug info might be incorrect. In this case, a call edge > >> count (calculated from BB count) could be much larger than callee's > >> header count, making the count_scale incorrectly large. > > > > In this case I still think we should handle this when producing the clone: > > we do not want to have clone's count much larger as well, so i think inliner > > and ipa-cp needs to deal with capping here instead.... > > > > Honza > >> > >> Dehao > >> > > >> > > >> > Honza
