From: 172060045@hdu.edu.cn
To: gcc <gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: Re: State of AutoFDO in GCC
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 22:45:01 +0800 (GMT+08:00) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d005159.55ea.1791e171ab9.Coremail.172060045@hdu.edu.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210429054025.GB4032392@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Hi all,
I`m using GCC 9.3 AutoFDO and the old version create_gcov on arm64
and it works well. Actually it support not only LBR like mode but
also inst_retired even cycles event, which`s the early implementation
of AutoFDO[1]. There is no difference in output format of create_gcov
between LBR mode and inst_retired. inst_retired is less accurate than
LBR but still works.
I hope AutoFDO could work better on GCC and am willing to contribute
to it, does anybody have suggestions for me?
[1] Ramasamy, Vinodha, et al. "Feedback-directed optimizations in gcc
with estimated edge profiles from hardware event sampling." (2008).
> On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 06:40:56PM +0000, Hongtao Yu wrote:
> > Andi, thanks for pointing out the perf script issues. Can you please
> > elaborate a bit on the exact issue you have seen? We’ve been using
> > specific output of perf script such as mmap, LBR and callstack events
> > filtered by process id. It works fine so far but may certainly hit issues
> > in the future with extended uses.
>
> Okay I took a look at the latest autofdo now. It seems to be basically
> a LLVM project now that depends on LLVM to even build with all kinds
> of dependency hell on some old LLVM version and other packages.
>
> I guess gcc will really need a replacement that doesn't pull in
> all of LLVM if it wants to continue supporting autofdo.
>
> I'm myself unable to build now.
>
> I'm using the old version I had a git fork of and that
> was before all of this. I added a patch to make it work
> with the latest perf by ignoring increased perf_attr
> and unknown perf events.
>
> Honza please use
>
> https://github.com/andikleen/autofdo -b perf-future
>
> for testing.
>
> -Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-29 14:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-22 19:58 Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-04-22 20:16 ` Martin Liška
2021-04-22 22:29 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-04-23 4:14 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-23 7:00 ` Richard Biener
2021-04-23 7:18 ` Martin Liška
2021-04-23 9:32 ` Richard Biener
2021-04-23 16:41 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-23 16:54 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-04-23 17:04 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-23 17:16 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-04-23 17:27 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-23 17:28 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-23 19:28 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-04-23 19:58 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-25 19:07 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-04-25 23:18 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-26 4:22 ` Wei Mi
2021-04-26 15:11 ` Andi Kleen
2021-04-26 16:57 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-26 18:00 ` Andi Kleen
2021-04-26 18:05 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-26 18:40 ` Hongtao Yu
2021-04-26 19:13 ` Andi Kleen
2021-04-29 5:40 ` Andi Kleen
2021-04-29 14:45 ` 172060045 [this message]
2021-04-30 21:43 ` Andi Kleen
2021-05-08 11:25 ` 172060045
2021-05-09 16:28 ` Andi Kleen
2021-05-09 17:01 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-05-10 15:36 ` Andi Kleen
2021-05-10 16:55 ` Joseph Myers
2021-05-10 17:21 ` Andi Kleen
2022-07-26 20:12 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2022-07-26 22:37 ` David Edelsohn
2022-07-27 7:26 ` Jan Hubicka
2022-07-27 18:30 ` [EXTERNAL] " Eugene Rozenfeld
2022-07-27 18:24 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2022-07-27 1:31 ` Xionghu Luo
2022-07-27 1:41 ` Xionghu Luo
2022-07-27 18:38 ` [EXTERNAL] " Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-05-10 23:46 ` Wei Mi
2021-05-22 1:28 ` [EXTERNAL] " Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-05-22 16:36 ` Wei Mi
2021-05-25 1:39 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-05-25 3:11 ` Wei Mi
2021-05-25 3:33 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-05-25 3:54 ` Wei Mi
2021-05-25 7:01 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-05-25 16:16 ` Wei Mi
2021-05-25 20:49 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-05-26 3:06 ` Wei Mi
2021-05-26 23:39 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-05-27 2:51 ` Wei Mi
2021-06-12 1:14 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-06-14 17:00 ` Wei Mi
2021-04-23 17:20 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-04-23 16:36 ` Xinliang David Li
2021-04-30 18:48 ` [EXTERNAL] " Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-04-30 21:45 ` Andi Kleen
2021-06-24 21:45 ` Eugene Rozenfeld
2021-04-23 1:46 ` Bin.Cheng
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4d005159.55ea.1791e171ab9.Coremail.172060045@hdu.edu.cn \
--to=172060045@hdu.edu.cn \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).