similar to: [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 indirect call

Hi Betul, I've finally gotten around to going over this in detail - sorry for the delay, and thanks for working on this. I think that the general approach is a good one, and that this will end up working well. I have a couple of points on a high level, and I'll also send some review for the patches you've sent out. - The raw profile format does not need to be backwards compatible,

"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" and a "for" apart implicitly. Just store one

My suggestion: 1. Keep the value kind enum, but remove the reserved 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>

> 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

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

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

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:

> 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 the >> frequently taken target addresses and their call

> 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 the >> frequently taken target addresses and their call

Hi, we've implemented an indirect call promotion llvm pass. The design notes including examples are shown below. This pass complements the indirect call profile infrastructure http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/pipermail/llvmdev/2015-April/084271.html Your feedback and comments will be highly appreciated. Thanks, Ivan ============================================================================RFC:

> On 2015 May 27, at 07:42, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Lee Hunt <leehu at exchange.microsoft.com> wrote: > >> For example, from reading different pages on how Clang PGO, it’s unclear if >> it does “block reordering” (i.e. moving unexecuted code blocks to a distant >> code page, leaving only ‘hot’

Hello - I'm an Engineer in Microsoft Office after looking into possible advantages of using PGO for our Android Applications. We at Microsoft have deep experience with Visual C++'s Profile Guided Optimization<https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/e7k32f4k.aspx> and often see 10% or more reduction in the size of application code loaded after using PGO for key scenarios (e.g.

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 stored intermixed. That is about it. More replies below. On Mon, Jun 29, 2015

Hi All, Our team at Facebook is building a new context-sensitive Sample PGO as an alternative to the existing AutoFDO. We’d like to share our motivation, propose a new design, and reveal preliminary results on benchmarks. We will refer to the proposed design as CSSPGO in this RFC. The new CSSPGO leverages simultaneous LBR and stack sampling to construct a full context-sensitive profile. It

On 16.09.14 15:09, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 05:06:57PM +0300, Shahar Havivi wrote: > > I am using upstream qemu while using this local variables: > > export PATH=/home/shahar/git/qemu:$PATH > > export LIBGUESTFS_HV=/home/shahar/git/qemu/x86_64-softmmu/qemu-system-x86_64 > > > > Is that sufficient? > > Yup, upstream qemu should

Hi, I am trying to convert from esx server to local directory a VM names CSB, Its build from source 77b371b18b6a7ad37105a595931514f542a04396 When running: LIBGUESTFS_BACKEND=direct ./run ./v2v/virt-v2v -ic "esx://root@10.35.5.45/?no_verify=1" -o local -of raw -os /tmp/v2v CSB I get the following: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- [ 0.0]

On 05/27/2015 11:13 AM, Duncan P. N. Exon Smith wrote: >> On 2015 May 27, at 07:42, Diego Novillo <dnovillo at google.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 11:47 PM, Lee Hunt <leehu at exchange.microsoft.com> wrote: >> >>> For example, from reading different pages on how Clang PGO, it’s unclear if >>> it does “block reordering” (i.e. moving

From: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz at microsoft.com> Subject: staging: hv: Fix race condition on IC channel initialization There is a possible race condition when hv_utils starts to load immediately after hv_vmbus is loading - null pointer error could happen. This patch added an atomic counter to ensure all channels are ready before vmbus_init() returns. So another module won't have any

From: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz at microsoft.com> Subject: staging: hv: Fix race condition on IC channel initialization There is a possible race condition when hv_utils starts to load immediately after hv_vmbus is loading - null pointer error could happen. This patch added an atomic counter to ensure all channels are ready before vmbus_init() returns. So another module won't have any