|Basic-Block Profiling Isn't Always Accurate firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-03-08)|
|Re: Basic-Block Profiling Isn't Always Accurate email@example.com (1993-03-09)|
|Re: Basic-Block Profiling Isn't Always Accurate firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-03-11)|
|Re: Basic-Block Profiling Isn't Always Accurate email@example.com (1993-03-12)|
|Re: Basic-Block Profiling Isn't Always Accurate firstname.lastname@example.org (1993-03-14)|
|From:||email@example.com (Andy Glew)|
|Organization:||Intel Corp., Hillsboro, Oregon|
|Date:||Thu, 11 Mar 1993 07:14:09 GMT|
For example "Trace Selection for Compiling Large C Application
Programs to Microcode" by P. P. Chang and W. W. Hwu in MICRO-21 1988,
discusses the benefit of using edge profile information in trace
In private conversation, Pohua (P.P. Chang) has indicated that he rarely
finds edge profile information useful in trace selection - i.e. the
additional information is rarely used to generate better code.
I must admit that I find this surprising. I (and many others, I'm sure)
pushed for edge profiling, because I have found edge probability info
useful in doing hand assembly code -- and I usually expect that something
I can do by hand should be automatable. It may be that none of the
optimizations Pohua uses really benefit from edge profiling, but that
there may be others that do.
Pohua - if you are out there, care to comment? Have I blatantly
misrepresented you? Do you now find edge profiling really useful feedback
for a compiler?
Andy Glew, firstname.lastname@example.org
Intel Corp., M/S JF1-19, 5200 NE Elam Young Pkwy,
Hillsboro, Oregon 97124-6497
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.