[coverage] Enable optimizations in block coverage modes

Now that function counts are based on dedicated call counters instead of FeedbackVector::invocation_count, we can enable optimizations for block coverage modes. This significantly speeds up V8 with enabled coverage: Before this CL, the web-tooling-benchmark regressed by 70% (block count coverage vs. no coverage). With this CL, the regression is reduced to 40%. Bug: v8:6000,v8:9148 Change-Id: I6bb538bd66f32f016c66c1d1996bce3b25958232 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/v8/v8/+/1615241 Commit-Queue: Jakob Gruber <jgruber@chromium.org> Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <yangguo@chromium.org> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#61582}
v8 · May 16, 2019 · 8c33e28 · 8c33e28
1 parent ba7b25e
commit 8c33e28
Show file tree

Hide file tree

Showing 3 changed files with 9 additions and 4 deletions.
diff --git a/src/isolate.cc b/src/isolate.cc
@@ -3696,7 +3696,7 @@ CodeTracer* Isolate::GetCodeTracer() {
 
 bool Isolate::use_optimizer() {
   return FLAG_opt && !serializer_enabled_ && CpuFeatures::SupportsOptimizer() &&
-         !is_count_code_coverage();
+         !is_precise_count_code_coverage();
 }
 
 bool Isolate::NeedsDetailedOptimizedCodeLineInfo() const {

diff --git a/src/objects.cc b/src/objects.cc
@@ -5251,7 +5251,7 @@ bool SharedFunctionInfo::IsInlineable() {
     return false;
   }
 
-  if (GetIsolate()->is_binary_code_coverage() &&
+  if (GetIsolate()->is_precise_binary_code_coverage() &&
       !has_reported_binary_coverage()) {
     // We may miss invocations if this function is inlined.
     TraceInlining(*this, "false (requires reported binary coverage)");

diff --git a/test/inspector/cpu-profiler/coverage-block-expected.txt b/test/inspector/cpu-profiler/coverage-block-expected.txt
@@ -221,7 +221,7 @@ Running test: testPreciseCountCoverageIncremental
     result : {
         result : {
             type : string
-            value : unoptimized
+            value : optimized
         }
     }
 }
@@ -262,10 +262,15 @@ Running test: testPreciseCountCoverageIncremental
                                 startOffset : 74
                             }
                             [1] : {
-                                count : 0
+                                count : 1
                                 endOffset : 156
                                 startOffset : 143
                             }
+                            [2] : {
+                                count : 1
+                                endOffset : 172
+                                startOffset : 157
+                            }
                         ]
                     }
                 ]