Extend the memop value profile buckets to be more flexible (could accommodate a
mix of individual values and ranges) and to cover more value ranges (from 11 to
22 buckets).
Disabled behind a flag (to be enabled separately) and the existing code to be
removed later.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D81682
Try again with an up-to-date version of D69471 (99317124 was a stale
revision).
---
Revise the coverage mapping format to reduce binary size by:
1. Naming function records and marking them `linkonce_odr`, and
2. Compressing filenames.
This shrinks the size of llc's coverage segment by 82% (334MB -> 62MB)
and speeds up end-to-end single-threaded report generation by 10%. For
reference the compressed name data in llc is 81MB (__llvm_prf_names).
Rationale for changes to the format:
- With the current format, most coverage function records are discarded.
E.g., more than 97% of the records in llc are *duplicate* placeholders
for functions visible-but-not-used in TUs. Placeholders *are* used to
show under-covered functions, but duplicate placeholders waste space.
- We reached general consensus about giving (1) a try at the 2017 code
coverage BoF [1]. The thinking was that using `linkonce_odr` to merge
duplicates is simpler than alternatives like teaching build systems
about a coverage-aware database/module/etc on the side.
- Revising the format is expensive due to the backwards compatibility
requirement, so we might as well compress filenames while we're at it.
This shrinks the encoded filenames in llc by 86% (12MB -> 1.6MB).
See CoverageMappingFormat.rst for the details on what exactly has
changed.
Fixes PR34533 [2], hopefully.
[1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-October/118428.html
[2] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34533
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69471
Revise the coverage mapping format to reduce binary size by:
1. Naming function records and marking them `linkonce_odr`, and
2. Compressing filenames.
This shrinks the size of llc's coverage segment by 82% (334MB -> 62MB)
and speeds up end-to-end single-threaded report generation by 10%. For
reference the compressed name data in llc is 81MB (__llvm_prf_names).
Rationale for changes to the format:
- With the current format, most coverage function records are discarded.
E.g., more than 97% of the records in llc are *duplicate* placeholders
for functions visible-but-not-used in TUs. Placeholders *are* used to
show under-covered functions, but duplicate placeholders waste space.
- We reached general consensus about giving (1) a try at the 2017 code
coverage BoF [1]. The thinking was that using `linkonce_odr` to merge
duplicates is simpler than alternatives like teaching build systems
about a coverage-aware database/module/etc on the side.
- Revising the format is expensive due to the backwards compatibility
requirement, so we might as well compress filenames while we're at it.
This shrinks the encoded filenames in llc by 86% (12MB -> 1.6MB).
See CoverageMappingFormat.rst for the details on what exactly has
changed.
Fixes PR34533 [2], hopefully.
[1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-October/118428.html
[2] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34533
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69471
Revise the coverage mapping format to reduce binary size by:
1. Naming function records and marking them `linkonce_odr`, and
2. Compressing filenames.
This shrinks the size of llc's coverage segment by 82% (334MB -> 62MB)
and speeds up end-to-end single-threaded report generation by 10%. For
reference the compressed name data in llc is 81MB (__llvm_prf_names).
Rationale for changes to the format:
- With the current format, most coverage function records are discarded.
E.g., more than 97% of the records in llc are *duplicate* placeholders
for functions visible-but-not-used in TUs. Placeholders *are* used to
show under-covered functions, but duplicate placeholders waste space.
- We reached general consensus about giving (1) a try at the 2017 code
coverage BoF [1]. The thinking was that using `linkonce_odr` to merge
duplicates is simpler than alternatives like teaching build systems
about a coverage-aware database/module/etc on the side.
- Revising the format is expensive due to the backwards compatibility
requirement, so we might as well compress filenames while we're at it.
This shrinks the encoded filenames in llc by 86% (12MB -> 1.6MB).
See CoverageMappingFormat.rst for the details on what exactly has
changed.
Fixes PR34533 [2], hopefully.
[1] http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2017-October/118428.html
[2] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=34533
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69471
This header fragment is useful on its own for any consumer that wants
to use custom instruction profile runtime with the LLVM instrumentation.
The concrete use case is in Fuchsia's kernel where we want to use
instruction profile instrumentation, but we cannot use the compiler-rt
runtime because it's not designed for use in the kernel environment.
This change allows installing this header as part of compiler-rt.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64532
This header fragment is useful on its own for any consumer that wants
to use custom instruction profile runtime with the LLVM instrumentation.
The concrete use case is in Fuchsia's kernel where we want to use
instruction profile instrumentation, but we cannot use the compiler-rt
runtime because it's not designed for use in the kernel environment.
This change allows installing this header as part of compiler-rt.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D64532
Hiroshi Yamauchi