[PATCH] D108342: [CSSPGO] Enable loading MD5 CS profile.

[Wenlei He via Phabricator via llvm-commits]

wenlei added a comment.

In D108342#2973944 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108342#2973944>, @hoy wrote:

> In D108342#2973938 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108342#2973938>, @wenlei wrote:
>
>> In D108342#2973929 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108342#2973929>, @hoy wrote:
>>
>>> In D108342#2973777 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D108342#2973777>, @wenlei wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I had to use llvm-profdata simply because of the support of md5 in llvm-profgen was not ready. It shouldn't be too slow now for llvm-profgen to use real names with the context split work. We could give Lei's approach a shot to see how much win can be get.
>>>>
>>>> What I was wondering is what does it take for md5 support to be ready for llvm-profgen? I thought it's close to a no-op as llvm-profgen use the same writer, and the handling md5 is in the writer. Of course we can use Lei's change to make it faster, but that's just optimization.
>>>
>>> I see. It should be straightforward to add md5 support to llvm-profgen.  I just added here.
>>
>> Ok, thanks. Yeah this is what I'm trying to understand - why not adding it here since it should be one-liner. :)
>>
>> Can you add md5 test case for llvm-profgen too? (We also need to address preinliner with md5 asap, ok for a later patch)
>
> A test is already added to noinline-cs-noprobe.test. Do you mean in another form? Since md5 profile is not text, I'm not sure what's a good way to check its content.

Ok, I didn't notice that one. But looking at it, I think we could check the profile summary (detailed summary) is the same as non-md5 profile?


Repository:
  rG LLVM Github Monorepo

CHANGES SINCE LAST ACTION
  https://reviews.llvm.org/D108342/new/

https://reviews.llvm.org/D108342