search for: betulb

> On 10/24/14, 8:26 PM, betulb at codeaurora.org wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> We've been working on enhancing LLVM's instrumentation based profiling >> by >> adding indirect call target profiling support. Our goal is to add >> instrumentation around indirect call sites, so that we may track...

> On 10/24/2014 05:26 PM, betulb at codeaurora.org wrote: >> Hi All, >> >> We've been working on enhancing LLVM's instrumentation based profiling >> by >> adding indirect call target profiling support. Our goal is to add >> instrumentation around indirect call sites, so that we may track...

Hi All, We've been working on enhancing LLVM's instrumentation based profiling by adding indirect call target profiling support. Our goal is to add instrumentation around indirect call sites, so that we may track the frequently taken target addresses and their call frequencies. The acquired data has uses in optimization of indirect function call heavy applications. Our initial findings

...writes: > I have sent my review comments. I think most of my high level concerns > have been addressed (except for last few minor fix ups). > > Justin, do you have a chance to take a look? > > thanks, > > David > > On Wed, May 13, 2015 at 10:49 AM, Betul Buyukkurt <betulb at codeaurora.org> wrote: >>> Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> writes: >>>>> From: <betulb at codeaurora.org> >>>>> Date: Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:44 PM >>>>> Subject: [LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure >>>>&...

> Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> writes: >>> From: <betulb at codeaurora.org> >>> Date: Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:44 PM >>> Subject: [LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure >>> To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu >>> >>> >>> >>> Hi All, >>> >>> We had sent out an RFC in October on indire...

> From: <betulb at codeaurora.org> > Date: Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 12:44 PM > Subject: [LLVMdev] IC profiling infrastructure > To: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > > > > Hi All, > > We had sent out an RFC in October on indirect call target profiling. The > proposal was about profiling target a...

"Betul Buyukkurt" <betulb at codeaurora.org> writes: >> - We don't need to store the value profiling kind in the data at all. >> The frontend knows which invocations of the intrinsic are for each kind >> implicitly, much like it knows the difference between a counter for an >> "if&q...

...kinds 2. In compiler-rt code, assert the kind to be icalltarget and remove the loop 3. Keep the indexed format (as is now) 4. Add assertion in profile use that icalltarget is the only expected kind. Justin, does this sound reasonable? David On Jul 2, 2015 1:10 PM, "Betul Buyukkurt" <betulb at codeaurora.org> wrote: > Any decision on below? Is everyone OK w/ removing the value_kind and > keeping > the raw profile writer and reader code to do exactly what we need it to do > today. Justin, if you agree, I'll make/upload the changes to right away? > > Thanks, &g...

Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> writes: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 5:35 PM, Justin Bogner <mail at justinbogner.com> wrote: >> "Betul Buyukkurt" <betulb at codeaurora.org> writes: >>>> - We don't need to store the value profiling kind in the data at all. >>>> The frontend knows which invocations of the intrinsic are for each kind >>>> implicitly, much like it knows the difference between a counter for...

> Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> writes: >> Justin, thanks for the reply. >> I would like to point out that value_kind is actually not really stored in the raw profile data (nor do we intend to do so), other than the minimal information about per value kind NumOfSites info in per-function profile header. Basically the data is organized per value kind instead of

Justin, do you have more concerns on keeping value_kind? If there is still disagreement, can we agree to move on with it for now ? After the initial version of the patches checked in, we can do more serious testings with large apps and revisit this if there are problems discovered. thanks, David On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:47 PM, Xinliang David Li <davidxl at google.com> wrote: