This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: bootstrapping with profiling feedback?
- From: Nix <nix at esperi dot demon dot co dot uk>
- To: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik at mandrakesoft dot com>
- Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 30 Jul 2002 00:28:53 +0100
- Subject: Re: bootstrapping with profiling feedback?
- References: <3D407F7B.4050103@mandrakesoft.com>
On Thu, 25 Jul 2002, Jeff Garzik spake:
> I'm assuming an implementation would look something like:
>
> build stage1 using platform compiler
> build stage2 using stage1 and -fprofile-arcs
> build stage3 using stage2 and -fbranch-probabilities
> build stage4 using stage3 and -fbranch-probabilities
> compare stage 3 and 4 .o files
>
> Maybe this could be called "make profilestrap"? ;-)
I'd like that too; but I'd be just as happy to have a slightly different
target that builds stage1 with -fprofile-arcs -ftest-coverage, and
likewise for everything else (right up tot the libraries and testsuite),
so we can see how much of the (machine-independent and relevant
-dependent) parts of the compiler is actually being tested by a
bootstrap&test run.
(We might have to unconditionally turn off one or all of these flags for
the appropriate parts of profile.c and/or libgcc2.c themselves :) a small
loss, we'll *know* they're being tested...)
Pie-in-the-sky, I dream of a target that just runs the testsuite with a
compiler with test-coverage turned on, but builds libraries and things
without that flag, so we can tell how much of the compiler the testsuite
alone is testing; the whole-lot results might be perturbed by changes in
the compiler, but if we are testing part of the compiler via the
testsuite, it's reasonable to suppose that it'll stay tested :)
--
`There's something satisfying about killing JWZ over and over again.'
-- 1i, personal communication