decide edge's hotness when there is profile info

Here is the patch updated to use the new parameter from r203830.
Passed bootstrap and regression tests.

2013-10-18  Jan Hubicka  <jh@suse.cz>
            Teresa Johnson  <tejohnson@google.com>

        * predict.c (handle_missing_profiles): New function.
        (counts_to_freqs): Don't overwrite estimated frequencies
        when function has no profile counts.
        * predict.h (handle_missing_profiles): Declare.
        * tree-profile.c (tree_profiling): Invoke handle_missing_profiles.

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 12:02 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson@google.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Teresa Johnson <tejohnson@google.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 2:03 PM, Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz> wrote:
>>>> >> Yes, that would work. So let's discard this patch because the fix for
>>>> >> comdat can also fix this problem.
>>>> >
>>>> > Unforutnately ipa-profile-estimate is an IPA pass and as such it does
>>>> > not have access to profile_status_to_function.
>>>>
>>>> I see. I was coding that up today but hadn't tested it yet.
>>>>
>>>> > You can probably just factor this out into a function that can be called
>>>> > and for normal FDO we call it where the loop stis now and for auto-FDO we can
>>>> > probably have another invocation from before early passes where auto-FDO is collected.
>>>>
>>>> Ok, let's go with that approach for now. It won't address the 0 count
>>>> COMDAT calling another 0 count COMDAT problem, but I will probably
>>>> just find a way to deal with this when inlining.
>>>
>>> You can still propagate, since tree-profile is an simple-ipa pass.
>>
>> Ok, I think I will leave that for the second patch, since I need to do
>> some testing on the effects - i.e. the propagation I had in mind would
>> make any 0-count routine called by a routine that was dropped to
>> guessed to also be dropped to guessed (and no longer unlikely). It may
>> be too aggressive, I need to check.
>>
>>>>
>>>> >> >>> +      if (node->count)
>>>> >> >>> + continue;
>>>> > Also here we should sum the counts and consider function non unlikely executed
>>>> > in the same way as probably_never_executed does.
>>>>
>>>> I assume you mean by doing the same comparison to the number of
>>>> profile->runs. Yes, this makes sense.
>>>
>>> Yes.
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > I can prepare updated patch, but i am currently travelling, so i would not
>>>> > be disapointed if you beat me ;)
>>>>
>>>> I'm working on it, and I think based on Dehao's needs I am going to
>>>> split up the patch into two phases, the one that does just the part
>>>> you had sent a patch for (making sure 0 count routines with non-zero
>>>> calls are marked guessed and have their node frequency set
>>>> appropriately), and a subsequent one to do the count application when
>>>> we inline a 0-count routine into a non-zero callsite. I'll shoot for
>>>> getting this ready by tomorrow.
>>>>
>>>> BTW, in your original patch you are checking for both e->count or
>>>> cgraph_maybe_hot_edge_p(e), but AFAICT the call to
>>>> cgraph_maybe_hot_edge_p will never return true when e->count is zero.
>>>> When there is a profile it will return false via maybe_hot_count_p
>>>> since e->count == 0. When there is no profile it will return false
>>>> when the callee has NODE_FREQUENCY_UNLIKELY_EXECUTED. So I think just
>>>> checking for e->count >0 is sufficient here.
>>>
>>> I think I was checking caller count here (that is read) and the code
>>> was supposed to make functoin with hot caller to be hot...
>>
>> The code in your patch was just checking the edge count, not the
>> caller count. cgraph_maybe_hot_edge_p also doesn't check the caller
>> count, just the edge count. Do we want to make all functions with hot
>> callers also be hot, even when the edge count is not hot? This may be
>> to aggressive. I was simply going to make the code check e->count.
>
> Here is the patch from Honza, that I revised based on discussions and
> testing. Once this related patch goes in, I can change the check against the
> profile_info->runs that hardcodes the threshold with the new parameter
> proposed for probably_never_executed there:
>   http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2013-10/msg00743.html
>
> Bootstrapped and tested on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
>
> Thanks, Teresa
>
> 2013-10-16  Jan Hubicka  <jh@suse.cz>
>             Teresa Johnson  <tejohnson@google.com>
>
>         * predict.c (handle_missing_profiles): New function.
>         (counts_to_freqs): Don't overwrite estimated frequencies
>         when function has no profile counts.
>         * predict.h (handle_missing_profiles): Declare.
>         * tree-profile.c (tree_profiling): Invoke handle_missing_profiles.
>
> Index: predict.c
> ===================================================================
> --- predict.c   (revision 203633)
> +++ predict.c   (working copy)
> @@ -2742,6 +2742,39 @@ estimate_loops (void)
>    BITMAP_FREE (tovisit);
>  }
>
> +void
> +handle_missing_profiles (void)
> +{
> +  struct cgraph_node *node;
> +  /* See if 0 count function has non-0 count callers.  In this case we
> +     lost some profile.  Drop its function profile to PROFILE_GUESSED.  */
> +  FOR_EACH_DEFINED_FUNCTION (node)
> +    {
> +      struct cgraph_edge *e;
> +      gcov_type call_count = 0;
> +      struct function *fn = DECL_STRUCT_FUNCTION (node->symbol.decl);
> +      if (node->count)
> +        continue;
> +      for (e = node->callers; e; e = e->next_caller)
> +        call_count += e->count;
> +      if (call_count
> +          && fn && fn->cfg
> +          && (call_count * 4 >= profile_info->runs))
> +        {
> +          bool maybe_hot = maybe_hot_count_p (NULL, call_count);
> +          if (dump_file)
> +            fprintf (dump_file,
> +                     "Dropping 0 profile for %s/%i. %s based on calls.\n",
> +                     cgraph_node_name (node), node->symbol.order,
> +                     maybe_hot ? "Function is hot" : "Function is normal");
> +          profile_status_for_function (fn)
> +              = (flag_guess_branch_prob ? PROFILE_GUESSED : PROFILE_ABSENT);
> +          node->frequency
> +              = maybe_hot ? NODE_FREQUENCY_HOT : NODE_FREQUENCY_NORMAL;
> +        }
> +    }
> +}
> +
>  /* Convert counts measured by profile driven feedback to frequencies.
>     Return nonzero iff there was any nonzero execution count.  */
>
> @@ -2751,6 +2784,9 @@ counts_to_freqs (void)
>    gcov_type count_max, true_count_max = 0;
>    basic_block bb;
>
> +  if (!ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR->count)
> +    return 0;
> +
>    FOR_BB_BETWEEN (bb, ENTRY_BLOCK_PTR, NULL, next_bb)
>      true_count_max = MAX (bb->count, true_count_max);
>
> Index: predict.h
> ===================================================================
> --- predict.h   (revision 203633)
> +++ predict.h   (working copy)
> @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ enum prediction
>
>  extern void predict_insn_def (rtx, enum br_predictor, enum prediction);
>  extern int counts_to_freqs (void);
> +extern void handle_missing_profiles (void);
>  extern void estimate_bb_frequencies (bool);
>  extern const char *predictor_name (enum br_predictor);
>  extern tree build_predict_expr (enum br_predictor, enum prediction);
> Index: tree-profile.c
> ===================================================================
> --- tree-profile.c      (revision 203633)
> +++ tree-profile.c      (working copy)
> @@ -607,6 +607,8 @@ tree_profiling (void)
>        pop_cfun ();
>      }
>
> +  handle_missing_profiles ();
> +
>    del_node_map ();
>    return 0;
>  }
>
>
>>
>> Teresa
>>
>>>
>>> Honza
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Teresa
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> > Honza
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson@google.com | 408-460-2413
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson@google.com | 408-460-2413
>
>
>
> --
> Teresa Johnson | Software Engineer | tejohnson@google.com | 408-460-2413

decide edge's hotness when there is profile info

Commit Message

Comments

Patch