Re: [tree-ssa]: PATCH: hookize profiling

[Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>]

On Feb 12, 2004, at 10:53 AM, Jan Hubicka wrote:

> > > We can just invent rtl_register_hooks, cfg_register_hooks that will
> > > call
> > > all three functions, but I don't see how much it will buy us and it
> > > will
> > > make it neccesary to store all three pointers in the CFG structure.
> > > Also the CFG expansion code is switching the hooks back and forth so 
> > > it
> > > is better to not make it more expensive.  (but none of these is big
> > > deal
> > > either, so if you see some stronger argument other way, just tell :)
> >
> > The profiling hooks and cfg hooks are not really independent; things
> > don't
> > work if the setting don't match.  So it seems to me that being able to
> > set
> > them independently can only introduce bugs, not help anything.  How
>
> I am mostly concerned about the interfaces.  I don't quite like the 
> idea
> of exposing something internal to profiler to cfg code.
> It also save some memory if we move to the multiple cfgs existing at
> once.  None of these are big deals tought.  Whats about ...
> > about this:  I put the profiling hook registration where you suggest,
> > and
> > have it call the cfg hook registration.  Does that work for you?
>
> Perhaps you can just add an sanity check to the registering function
> ensuring that the cfghooks are set the right way.
> That would ensure that hooks are right and calling tree pass with RTL
> hooks or RTL pass with SSA hooks is crazy idea anyway.

That sounds reasonable.  OK, here is a revised version.  I haven't 
fixed the
ChangeLog entry yet but I think this has everything else.

Attachment: diffs2.txt
Description: Text document

Attachment: tree-profile.c
Description: Text document

Attachment: rtl-profile.c
Description: Text document