Easwaran Raman via llvm-dev
2017-Oct-03 20:55 UTC
[llvm-dev] PGO information at LTO/thinLTO link step
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:> > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> wrote: > >> Hi Teresa, >> >> Actually, enabling the new pass manager manually seems to have solved >> this issue, so this problem is only valid for the old pass manager. >> > > It should not be an issue in the old PM either - the callsite hotness is > passed via IR. >More precisely, the function entry counts are passed via IR. With the old PM, we don't have callsite hotness information, but callee's entry count is used to boost the threshold.> As David mentioned, the new PM inliner does a better job of updating call > hotness after inlining, but it should be there (some things might look > hotter than then should, which seems to be the opposite of the problem you > are hitting). Can you send me a reproducer with the old PM? > > Teresa > >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Graham Yiu >> LLVM Compiler Development >> IBM Toronto Software Lab >> Office: (905) 413-4077 C2-707/8200/Markham >> Email: gyiu at ca.ibm.com >> >> [image: Inactive hide details for Teresa Johnson ---10/03/2017 04:18:17 >> PM---On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Graham Yiu via llvm-dev <]Teresa >> Johnson ---10/03/2017 04:18:17 PM---On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Graham >> Yiu via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> From: Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> >> To: Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> >> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> Date: 10/03/2017 04:18 PM >> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] PGO information at LTO/thinLTO link step >> ------------------------------ >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Graham Yiu via llvm-dev < >> *llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org* <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> My team and I noticed that callsite hotness information is not >> preserved from compile to link step with LTO/thinLTO enabled. As a result, >> the link step inlining pass remains conservative when inlining callsites >> known to be hot (ie. without the 'HotCallSiteThreshold' which is set at >> 3000 by default). There are likely many cross-module inlining opportunities >> lost this way, and diminishes the benefit of using LTO/thinLTO+PGO together. >> >> >> >> The callsite hotness is passed via the IR, so it should be there in the >> LTO/ThinLTO backends (during the link step). Can you provide a reproducer >> where that isn't happening? >> Teresa >> >> >> >> In general, does LLVM pass profiling information through the IR to >> the link step other than branch probabilities and function entry counts? If >> not, are there plans to do so in the future? For inlining specifically, >> perhaps we can mark callsites with hot/cold attributes during compile step >> to ensure LTO inlining will give appropriate threshold bonuses/penalties. >> >> Any thoughts/insights/comments would be appreciated. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Graham Yiu >> LLVM Compiler Development >> IBM Toronto Software Lab >> Office: *(905) 413-4077* <(905)%20413-4077> C2-707/8200/Markham >> Email: *gyiu at ca.ibm.com* <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> *llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org* <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >> *http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev* >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwMFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=4ST7e3kMd0GTi3w9ByK5Cw&m=843dScatsnrNnnksXYIg_bhjifer5nLwDpeZvFGhfsY&s=ophNPzRTV6yMQdp3RxwwiV4szFjf6F8lnEyy9Y5paxw&e=> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | *tejohnson at google.com* >> <tejohnson at google.com> | 408-460-2413 <(408)%20460-2413> >> >> >> > > > -- > Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson at google.com | > 408-460-2413 <(408)%20460-2413> > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org > http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev > >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171003/3a64b9eb/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: graycol.gif Type: image/gif Size: 105 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171003/3a64b9eb/attachment.gif>
Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev
2017-Oct-03 21:00 UTC
[llvm-dev] PGO information at LTO/thinLTO link step
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Easwaran Raman <eraman at google.com> wrote:> > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev < > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi Teresa, >>> >>> Actually, enabling the new pass manager manually seems to have solved >>> this issue, so this problem is only valid for the old pass manager. >>> >> >> It should not be an issue in the old PM either - the callsite hotness is >> passed via IR. >> > More precisely, the function entry counts are passed via IR. With the old > PM, we don't have callsite hotness information, but callee's entry count > is used to boost the threshold. >Thanks for the clarification. (But essentially there should be no difference between the profile info in the IR in the compile step vs the link aka ThinLTO backend steps - the inliner in both cases is working off the same profile info in the IR)> > >> As David mentioned, the new PM inliner does a better job of updating call >> hotness after inlining, but it should be there (some things might look >> hotter than then should, which seems to be the opposite of the problem you >> are hitting). Can you send me a reproducer with the old PM? >> >> Teresa >> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Graham Yiu >>> LLVM Compiler Development >>> IBM Toronto Software Lab >>> Office: (905) 413-4077 C2-707/8200/Markham >>> Email: gyiu at ca.ibm.com >>> >>> [image: Inactive hide details for Teresa Johnson ---10/03/2017 04:18:17 >>> PM---On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Graham Yiu via llvm-dev <]Teresa >>> Johnson ---10/03/2017 04:18:17 PM---On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Graham >>> Yiu via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >>> >>> From: Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com> >>> To: Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> >>> Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >>> Date: 10/03/2017 04:18 PM >>> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] PGO information at LTO/thinLTO link step >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Graham Yiu via llvm-dev < >>> *llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org* <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> My team and I noticed that callsite hotness information is not >>> preserved from compile to link step with LTO/thinLTO enabled. As a result, >>> the link step inlining pass remains conservative when inlining callsites >>> known to be hot (ie. without the 'HotCallSiteThreshold' which is set at >>> 3000 by default). There are likely many cross-module inlining opportunities >>> lost this way, and diminishes the benefit of using LTO/thinLTO+PGO together. >>> >>> >>> >>> The callsite hotness is passed via the IR, so it should be there in the >>> LTO/ThinLTO backends (during the link step). Can you provide a reproducer >>> where that isn't happening? >>> Teresa >>> >>> >>> >>> In general, does LLVM pass profiling information through the IR to >>> the link step other than branch probabilities and function entry counts? If >>> not, are there plans to do so in the future? For inlining specifically, >>> perhaps we can mark callsites with hot/cold attributes during compile step >>> to ensure LTO inlining will give appropriate threshold bonuses/penalties. >>> >>> Any thoughts/insights/comments would be appreciated. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Graham Yiu >>> LLVM Compiler Development >>> IBM Toronto Software Lab >>> Office: *(905) 413-4077* <(905)%20413-4077> C2-707/8200/Markham >>> Email: *gyiu at ca.ibm.com* <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> LLVM Developers mailing list >>> *llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org* <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> >>> *http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev* >>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwMFaQ&c=jf_iaSHvJObTbx-siA1ZOg&r=4ST7e3kMd0GTi3w9ByK5Cw&m=843dScatsnrNnnksXYIg_bhjifer5nLwDpeZvFGhfsY&s=ophNPzRTV6yMQdp3RxwwiV4szFjf6F8lnEyy9Y5paxw&e=> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | *tejohnson at google.com* >>> <tejohnson at google.com> | 408-460-2413 <(408)%20460-2413> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson at google.com | >> 408-460-2413 <(408)%20460-2413> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org >> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev >> >> >-- Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson at google.com | 408-460-2413 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171003/e1eb4dc8/attachment-0001.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: graycol.gif Type: image/gif Size: 105 bytes Desc: not available URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171003/e1eb4dc8/attachment-0001.gif>
Graham Yiu via llvm-dev
2017-Oct-03 21:10 UTC
[llvm-dev] PGO information at LTO/thinLTO link step
Thanks Easwaran. This is what we've observed as well, where the old PM
inliner was only looking hot/cold callee information, which have
signficantly smaller boosts/penalties compared to callsite information.
Teresa, do you know if there is some documentation/video/presentation on
how PGO information is represented in LLVM and what information is passed
via the IR? I'm finding some difficulty in getting the big picture via the
code.
Graham Yiu
LLVM Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Software Lab
Office: (905) 413-4077 C2-707/8200/Markham
Email: gyiu at ca.ibm.com
From: Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com>
To: Easwaran Raman <eraman at google.com>
Cc: Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com>, llvm-dev
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Date: 10/03/2017 05:00 PM
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] PGO information at LTO/thinLTO link step
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:55 PM, Easwaran Raman <eraman at google.com>
wrote:
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:46 PM, Teresa Johnson via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 1:38 PM, Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com> wrote:
Hi Teresa,
Actually, enabling the new pass manager manually seems to have solved
this issue, so this problem is only valid for the old pass manager.
It should not be an issue in the old PM either - the callsite hotness is
passed via IR.
More precisely, the function entry counts are passed via IR. With the old
PM, we don't have callsite hotness information, but callee's entry
count
is used to boost the threshold.
Thanks for the clarification. (But essentially there should be no
difference between the profile info in the IR in the compile step vs the
link aka ThinLTO backend steps - the inliner in both cases is working off
the same profile info in the IR)
As David mentioned, the new PM inliner does a better job of updating
call hotness after inlining, but it should be there (some things might
look hotter than then should, which seems to be the opposite of the
problem you are hitting). Can you send me a reproducer with the old PM?
Teresa
Thanks,
Graham Yiu
LLVM Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Software Lab
Office: (905) 413-4077 C2-707/8200/Markham
Email: gyiu at ca.ibm.com
Inactive hide details for Teresa Johnson ---10/03/2017 04:18:17
PM---On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Graham Yiu via llvm-dev <Teresa
Johnson ---10/03/2017 04:18:17 PM---On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM,
Graham Yiu via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
From: Teresa Johnson <tejohnson at google.com>
To: Graham Yiu <gyiu at ca.ibm.com>
Cc: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Date: 10/03/2017 04:18 PM
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] PGO information at LTO/thinLTO link step
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 12:54 PM, Graham Yiu via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
Hello,
My team and I noticed that callsite hotness information is not
preserved from compile to link step with LTO/thinLTO enabled. As
a result, the link step inlining pass remains conservative when
inlining callsites known to be hot (ie. without the
'HotCallSiteThreshold' which is set at 3000 by default).
There
are likely many cross-module inlining opportunities lost this
way, and diminishes the benefit of using LTO/thinLTO+PGO
together.
The callsite hotness is passed via the IR, so it should be there in
the LTO/ThinLTO backends (during the link step). Can you provide a
reproducer where that isn't happening?
Teresa
In general, does LLVM pass profiling information through the IR
to the link step other than branch probabilities and function
entry counts? If not, are there plans to do so in the future?
For inlining specifically, perhaps we can mark callsites with
hot/cold attributes during compile step to ensure LTO inlining
will give appropriate threshold bonuses/penalties.
Any thoughts/insights/comments would be appreciated.
Cheers,
Graham Yiu
LLVM Compiler Development
IBM Toronto Software Lab
Office: (905) 413-4077 C2-707/8200/Markham
Email: gyiu at ca.ibm.com
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
--
|-----------+-------------+--------------------+------------|
|Teresa | Software | | |
|Johnson | |Engineer | |tejohnson at google.com|408-460-2413|
| | || | |
|-----------+-------------+--------------------+------------|
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Teresa Software
Johnson | Engineer | tejohnson at google.com 408-460-2413
|
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
--
-----------------------------------------------------------
Teresa Software
Johnson | Engineer | tejohnson at google.com 408-460-2413
|
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171003/d89f26e7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: graycol.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20171003/d89f26e7/attachment.gif>