fbranch-probabilities bug

[Hariharan]

Hi Seongbae,
Does that mean that someone cant use the profile just to annotate 
branches (and get better code by that), without having to get the 
additional baggage of "unroll-loops", "peel-loops" etc?

In my case, i am interested in not bloating the code size, but get any 
performance that is to be had from profiling. Is that possible?

Note: My profile generate phase was also just -fprofile-arcs since i am 
not interested in other kinds of profile.

Cheers
Hari

Seongbae Park ??? ??? wrote:
> This is the intended behavior, though now I see that the documentation
> isn't very clear.
> You need to use -fprofile-use - the typical usage scenario is to
> compile with -fprofile-generate
> to build an executable to do profile collection, and then compile with
> -fprofile-use
> to build optimized code using the profile data.
> 
> Seongbae
> 
> On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:30 AM, Hariharan Sandanagobalane
> <hariharans@picochip.com> wrote:
>> Hi Seongbae,
>> I was doing some work on profiling for picochip, when i noticed what looks
>> to me like a bug. It looks to me that using fbranch-probabilities on the
>> commandline (after a round of profile-generate or profile-arcs) would just
>> not work on any target. Reason..
>>
>> Coverage.c:1011
>>
>>  if (flag_profile_use)
>>    read_counts_file ();
>>
>> Should this not be
>>
>>  if (flag_profile_use || flag_branch_probabilities)  // Maybe more flags
>>    read_counts_file ();
>>
>> ??
>>
>> Of course, i hit the problem later on since the counts were not read, it
>> just assumed that the .gcda file were not available, when it actually was.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Hari
>>