[PATCH] D15548: Remove the restriction that known and unknown probabilities cannot coexist when being normalized.

[Cong Hou via llvm-commits]

On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:45 AM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com>
wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 10:41 AM, Cong Hou <congh at google.com> wrote:
> > congh added a comment.
> >
> > In http://reviews.llvm.org/D15548#312148, @davidxl wrote:
> >
> >> While it makes sense to do this -- can we start to teach producers not
> to pass unknown Probabilities in the first place?
> >
> >
> > If you search addSuccessor in LLVM, you will find about 200 users for
> different platforms without probability passed explicitly. Some are
> conditionally used such as:
> >
> > MBB->addSuccessor(Succ1);
> > if (...)
> >
> >   MBB->addSuccessor(Succ2);
> >
> > It seems that a default probability is more convenient but I don't
> object to add probabilities explicitly. There are just some tradeoffs.
>
> yes -- that is a longer term cleanup. After all the cases are cleaned
> up, we can add more restrictions.
>

Agree. So can we check in this patch first to recover related build
breakage from outside?


>
> David
> >
> >
> > http://reviews.llvm.org/D15548
> >
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-commits/attachments/20151216/f849c7cf/attachment.html>