[interpreter] Make tick counter test code properly warm-up.

R=rmcilroy@chromium.org
BUG=v8:4680

Review-Url: https://codereview.chromium.org/2282733002
Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#39163}
This commit is contained in:
mstarzinger 2016-09-05 04:56:16 -07:00 committed by Commit bot
parent 75d4db728b
commit 5fd798afd6
2 changed files with 4 additions and 6 deletions

View File

@ -360,10 +360,6 @@
# in interpreter.
'test-heap/CompilationCacheCachingBehavior': [FAIL],
# BUG(rmcilroy,4680): Function is optimized without type feedback and so immediately deopts again, causing check failure in the test.
'test-heap/ResetSharedFunctionInfoCountersDuringIncrementalMarking': [FAIL],
'test-heap/ResetSharedFunctionInfoCountersDuringMarkSweep': [FAIL],
# BUG(4680): Missing type feedback makes optimistic optimizations fail.
'test-cpu-profiler/CollectDeoptEvents': [FAIL],
'test-cpu-profiler/DeoptUntrackedFunction': [SKIP],
@ -407,8 +403,6 @@
'test-heap/OptimizedPretenuringNestedObjectLiterals': [FAIL],
'test-heap/OptimizedPretenuringObjectArrayLiterals': [FAIL],
'test-heap/Regress169209': [FAIL],
'test-heap/ResetSharedFunctionInfoCountersDuringIncrementalMarking': [FAIL],
'test-heap/ResetSharedFunctionInfoCountersDuringMarkSweep': [FAIL],
'test-heap/TestCodeFlushing': [FAIL],
'test-heap/TestCodeFlushingIncremental': [FAIL],
'test-heap/TestCodeFlushingIncrementalScavenge': [FAIL],

View File

@ -2716,6 +2716,8 @@ TEST(ResetSharedFunctionInfoCountersDuringIncrementalMarking) {
" return s;"
"}"
"f(); f();"
"%BaselineFunctionOnNextCall(f);"
"f(); f();"
"%OptimizeFunctionOnNextCall(f);"
"f();");
}
@ -2760,6 +2762,8 @@ TEST(ResetSharedFunctionInfoCountersDuringMarkSweep) {
" return s;"
"}"
"f(); f();"
"%BaselineFunctionOnNextCall(f);"
"f(); f();"
"%OptimizeFunctionOnNextCall(f);"
"f();");
}