Currently context strings contain a lot of duplicated function names and that significantly increase the profile size. This change split the context into a series of {name, offset, discriminator} tuples so function names used in the context can be replaced by the index into the name table and that significantly reduce the size consumed by context.
A follow-up improvement made in the compiler and profiling tools is to avoid reconstructing full context strings which is time- and memory- consuming. Instead a context vector of `StringRef` is adopted to represent the full context in all scenarios. As a result, the previous prevalent profile map which was implemented as a `StringRef` is now engineered as an unordered map keyed by `SampleContext`. `SampleContext` is reshaped to using an `ArrayRef` to represent a full context for CS profile. For non-CS profile, it falls back to use `StringRef` to represent a contextless function name. Both the `ArrayRef` and `StringRef` objects are underpinned by real array and string objects that are stored in producer buffers. For compiler, they are maintained by the sample reader. For llvm-profgen, they are maintained in `ProfiledBinary` and `ProfileGenerator`. Full context strings can be generated only in those cases of debugging and printing.
When it comes to profile format, nothing has changed to the text format, though internally CS context is implemented as a vector. Extbinary format is only changed for CS profile, with an additional `SecCSNameTable` section which stores all full contexts logically in the form of `vector<int>`, which each element as an offset points to `SecNameTable`. All occurrences of contexts elsewhere are redirected to using the offset of `SecCSNameTable`.
Testing
This is no-diff change in terms of code quality and profile content (for text profile).
For our internal large service (aka ads), the profile generation is cut to half, with a 20x smaller string-based extbinary format generated.
The compile time of ads is dropped by 25%.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107299
As a follow-up to D99815, this patch enables the test by using a DAG order instead of a sequential order to mitigate the platform portability issue due to `std:: _Hash_bytes`.
Reviewed By: wenlei, jsji
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D100351
The case start to fail since https://reviews.llvm.org/D99351.
Looks like to me that the node order within Context Profile Tree depends
on the implmementation of std::hash<std::string>.
Unfortunately, the current clang implementation generate different values on
AIX (or for all big-endian systems?)
On Linux:
main: 2408804140(0x8f936f2c)
external: 896680882(0x357243b2)
externalA: 620231129(0x24f7f9d9)
On AIX:
main: 994322777(0x3b442959)
external: 3548191215(0xd37d19ef)
externalA: 1390365101(0x52df49ad)
XFAIL it first while we discuss and seek for a fix.
Reviewed By: wenlei
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99815
Use profiled call edges to augment the top-down order. There are cases that the top-down order computed based on the static call graph doesn't reflect real execution order. For example:
1. Incomplete static call graph due to unknown indirect call targets. Adjusting the order by considering indirect call edges from the profile can enable the inlining of indirect call targets by allowing the caller processed before them.
2. Mutual call edges in an SCC. The static processing order computed for an SCC may not reflect the call contexts in the context-sensitive profile, thus may cause potential inlining to be overlooked. The function order in one SCC is being adjusted to a top-down order based on the profile to favor more inlining.
3. Transitive indirect call edges due to inlining. When a callee function is inlined into into a caller function in LTO prelink, every call edge originated from the callee will be transferred to the caller. If any of the transferred edges is indirect, the original profiled indirect edge, even if considered, would not enforce a top-down order from the caller to the potential indirect call target in LTO postlink since the inlined callee is gone from the static call graph.
4. #3 can happen even for direct call targets, due to functions defined in header files. Header functions, when included into source files, are defined multiple times but only one definition survives due to ODR. Therefore, the LTO prelink inlining done on those dropped definitions can be useless based on a local file scope. More importantly, the inlinee, once fully inlined to a to-be-dropped inliner, will have no profile to consume when its outlined version is compiled. This can lead to a profile-less prelink compilation for the outlined version of the inlinee function which may be called from external modules. while this isn't easy to fix, we rely on the postlink AutoFDO pipeline to optimize the inlinee. Since the survived copy of the inliner (defined in headers) can be inlined in its local scope in prelink, it may not exist in the merged IR in postlink, and we'll need the profiled call edges to enforce a top-down order for the rest of the functions.
Considering those cases, a profiled call graph completely independent of the static call graph is constructed based on profile data, where function objects are not even needed to handle case #3 and case 4.
I'm seeing an average 0.4% perf win out of SPEC2017. For certain benchmark such as Xalanbmk and GCC, the win is bigger, above 2%.
The change is an enhancement to https://reviews.llvm.org/D95988.
Reviewed By: wmi, wenlei
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D99351
This change implemented call site prioritized BFS profile guided inlining for sample profile loader. The new inlining strategy maximize the benefit of context-sensitive profile as mentioned in the follow up discussion of CSSPGO RFC. The change will not affect today's AutoFDO as it's opt-in. CSSPGO now defaults to the new FDO inliner, but can fall back to today's replay inliner using a switch (`-sample-profile-prioritized-inline=0`).
Motivation
With baseline AutoFDO, the inliner in sample profile loader only replays previous inlining, and the use of profile is only for pruning previous inlining that turned out to be cold. Due to the nature of replay, the FDO inliner is simple with hotness being the only decision factor. It has the following limitations that we're improving now for CSSPGO.
- It doesn't take inline candidate size into account. Since it's doing replay, the size growth is bounded by previous CGSCC inlining. With context-sensitive profile, FDO inliner is no longer limited by previous inlining, so we need to take size into account to avoid significant size bloat.
- The way it looks at hotness is not accurate. It uses total samples in an inlinee as proxy for hotness, while what really matters for an inline decision is the call site count. This is an unfortunate fall back because call site count and callee entry count are not reliable due to dwarf based correlation, especially for inlinees. Now paired with pseudo-probe, we have accurate call site count and callee's entry count, so we can use that to gauge hotness more accurately.
- It treats all call sites from a block as hot as long as there's one call site considered hot. This is normally true, but since total samples is used as hotness proxy, this transitiveness within block magnifies the inacurate hotness heuristic. With pseduo-probe and the change above, this is no longer an issue for CSSPGO.
New FDO Inliner
Putting all the requirement for CSSPGO together, we need a top-down call site prioritized BFS inliner. Here're reasons why each component is needed.
- Top-down: We need a top-down inliner to better leverage context-sensitive profile, so inlining is driven by accurate context profile, and post-inline is also accurate. This is already implemented in https://reviews.llvm.org/D70655.
- Size Cap: For top-down inliner, taking function size into account for inline decision alone isn't sufficient to control size growth. We also need to explicitly cap size growth because with top-down inlining, we can grow inliner size significantly with large number of smaller inlinees even if each individually passes the cost/size check.
- Prioritize call sites: With size cap, inlining order also becomes important, because if we stop inlining due to size budget limit, we'd want to use budget towards the most beneficial call sites.
- BFS inline: Same as call site prioritization, if we stop inlining due to size budget limit, we want a balanced inline tree, rather than going deep on one call path.
Note that the new inliner avoids repeatedly evaluating same set of call site, so it should help with compile time too. For this reason, we could transition today's FDO inliner to use a queue with equal priority to avoid wasted reevaluation of same call site (TODO).
Speculative indirect call promotion and inlining is also supported now with CSSPGO just like baseline AutoFDO.
Tunings and knobs
I created tuning knobs for size growth/cap control, and for hot threshold separate from CGSCC inliner. The default values are selected based on initial tuning with CSSPGO.
Results
Evaluated with an internal LLVM fork couple months ago, plus another change to adjust hot-threshold cutoff for context profile (will send up after this one), the new inliner show ~1% geomean perf win on spec2006 with CSSPGO, while reducing code size too. The measurement was done using train-train setup, MonoLTO w/ new pass manager and pseudo-probe. Note that this is just a starting point - we hope that the new inliner will open up more opportunity with CSSPGO, but it will certainly take more time and effort to make it fully calibrated and ready for bigger workloads (we're working on it).
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94001
This change adds the context-senstive sample PGO infracture described in CSSPGO RFC (https://groups.google.com/g/llvm-dev/c/1p1rdYbL93s). It introduced an abstraction between input profile and profile loader that queries input profile for functions. Specifically, there's now the notion of base profile and context profile, and they are managed by the new SampleContextTracker for adjusting and merging profiles based on inline decisions. It works with top-down profiled guided inliner in profile loader (https://reviews.llvm.org/D70655) for better inlining with specialization and better post-inline profile fidelity. In the future, we can also expose this infrastructure to CGSCC inliner in order for it to take advantage of context-sensitive profile. This change is the consumption part of context-sensitive profile (The generation part is in this stack: https://reviews.llvm.org/D89707). We've seen good results internally in conjunction with Pseudo-probe (https://reviews.llvm.org/D86193). Pacthes for integration with Pseudo-probe coming up soon.
Currently the new infrastructure kick in when input profile contains the new context-sensitive profile; otherwise it's no-op and does not affect existing AutoFDO.
**Interface**
There're two sets of interfaces for query and tracking respectively exposed from SampleContextTracker. For query, now instead of simply getting a profile from input for a function, we can explicitly query base profile or context profile for given call path of a function. For tracking, there're separate APIs for marking context profile as inlined, or promoting and merging not inlined context profile.
- Query base profile (`getBaseSamplesFor`)
Base profile is the merged synthetic profile for function's CFG profile from any outstanding (not inlined) context. We can query base profile by function.
- Query context profile (`getContextSamplesFor`)
Context profile is a function's CFG profile for a given calling context. We can query context profile by context string.
- Track inlined context profile (`markContextSamplesInlined`)
When a function is inlined for given calling context, we need to mark the context profile for that context as inlined. This is to make sure we don't include inlined context profile when synthesizing base profile for that inlined function.
- Track not-inlined context profile (`promoteMergeContextSamplesTree`)
When a function is not inlined for given calling context, we need to promote the context profile tree so the not inlined context becomes top-level context. This preserve the sub-context under that function so later inline decision for that not inlined function will still have context profile for its call tree. Note that profile will be merged if needed when promoting a context profile tree if any of the node already exists at its promoted destination.
**Implementation**
Implementation-wise, `SampleContext` is created as abstraction for context. Currently it's a string for call path, and we can later optimize it to something more efficient, e.g. context id. Each `SampleContext` also has a `ContextState` indicating whether it's raw context profile from input, whether it's inlined or merged, whether it's synthetic profile created by compiler. Each `FunctionSamples` now has a `SampleContext` that tells whether it's base profile or context profile, and for context profile what is the context and state.
On top of the above context representation, a custom trie tree is implemented to track and manager context profiles. Specifically, `SampleContextTracker` is implemented that encapsulates a trie tree with `ContextTireNode` as node. Each node of the trie tree represents a frame in calling context, thus the path from root to a node represents a valid calling context. We also track `FunctionSamples` for each node, so this trie tree can serve efficient query for context profile. Accordingly, context profile tree promotion now becomes moving a subtree to be under the root of entire tree, and merge nodes for subtree if this move encounters existing nodes.
**Integration**
`SampleContextTracker` is now also integrated with AutoFDO, `SampleProfileReader` and `SampleProfileLoader`. When we detected input profile contains context-sensitive profile, `SampleContextTracker` will be used to track profiles, and all profile query will go to `SampleContextTracker` instead of `SampleProfileReader` automatically. Tracking APIs are called automatically for each inline decision from `SampleProfileLoader`.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D90125
Hongtao Yu