Displaying 4 results from an estimated 4 matches for "instrprofvaluerecord".
2015 Jun 29
3
[LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure
...et it right. If we're pretty confident that the value profile
> data structure we're encoding in the .profdata file is going to work
> for multiple value profile kinds, then it makes sense to allow
> multiple of them and encode which kinds they are. David, is
> "InstrProfValueRecord" in Betul's current patches going to work to
> record the other types of value profiling information you're planning
> on looking at?
The raw profile format is certainly good for other kinds.
InstrProfValueRecord is mostly there (for instance overloading the
Name field for...
2015 Jun 30
3
[LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure
...gt;> can get it right. If we're pretty confident that the value profile
data structure we're encoding in the .profdata file is going to
work
>>> for multiple value profile kinds, then it makes sense to allow
multiple of them and encode which kinds they are. David, is
"InstrProfValueRecord" in Betul's current patches going to work to
record the other types of value profiling information you're
> planning
>>> on looking at?
>> The raw profile format is certainly good for other kinds.
> I'm not talking about the raw profile format here. This poi...
2015 Jul 03
3
[LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure
...;re pretty confident that the value
> >>> profile
> data structure we're encoding in the .profdata file is going to work
> >>> for multiple value profile kinds, then it makes sense to allow
> multiple of them and encode which kinds they are. David, is
> "InstrProfValueRecord" in Betul's current patches going to work to record
> the other types of value profiling information you're
> > planning
> >>> on looking at?
> >> The raw profile format is certainly good for other kinds.
> > I'm not talking about the raw prof...
2015 Jun 22
4
[LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure
Justin, do you have more concerns on keeping value_kind?
If there is still disagreement, can we agree to move on with it for
now ? After the initial version of the patches checked in, we can do
more serious testings with large apps and revisit this if there are
problems discovered.
thanks,
David
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> wrote: