File: iponly-nodupfactor.test

package info (click to toggle)
swiftlang 6.1.3-2
  • links: PTS, VCS
  • area: main
  • in suites: forky, sid
  • size: 2,791,604 kB
  • sloc: cpp: 9,901,740; ansic: 2,201,431; asm: 1,091,827; python: 308,252; objc: 82,166; f90: 80,126; lisp: 38,358; pascal: 25,559; sh: 20,429; ml: 5,058; perl: 4,745; makefile: 4,484; awk: 3,535; javascript: 3,018; xml: 918; fortran: 664; cs: 573; ruby: 396
file content (22 lines) | stat: -rw-r--r-- 1,044 bytes parent folder | download | duplicates (4) 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
 
; RUN: llvm-profgen --format=text --perfscript=%S/Inputs/ip-duplication.perfscript --binary=%S/Inputs/inline-noprobe2.perfbin --output=%t --use-offset=0 --leading-ip-only
; RUN: FileCheck %s --input-file %t --check-prefix=CHECK

; Test that we don't over-count samples for duplicated source code when
; building an IP-based profile.

; The inline-noprobe2.perfbin binary is used for this test because one of the
; partition_pivot_last+3.1 debug locations has a duplication factor of 2
; encoded into its discriminator. In IP-sample mode, a hit in one instruction
; in the duplicated code does not imply a hit to the other duplicates.

; The perfscript input includes 1 sample at a location with duplication factor
; of 2, and another sample at the same source location but with no duplication
; factor. These should be summed without duplication factors. Ensure we record
; a count of 1+1=2 (and not 2+1=3) for the 3.1 location.

;CHECK-LABEL: partition_pivot_last
;CHECK-NEXT:  1: 0
;CHECK-NEXT:  2: 0
;CHECK-NEXT:  3: 0
;CHECK-NEXT:  3.1: 2