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
Temporarily relax check in test to avoid
breakage for format change in LLVM side. Once that is
done, the test case will be retightened.
llvm-svn: 259955
This patch changes cc1 option -fprofile-instr-generate to an enum option
-fprofile-instrument={clang|none}. It also changes cc1 options
-fprofile-instr-generate= to -fprofile-instrument-path=.
The driver level option -fprofile-instr-generate and -fprofile-instr-generate=
remain intact. This change will pave the way to integrate new PGO
instrumentation in IR level.
Review: http://reviews.llvm.org/D16730
llvm-svn: 259811
This is one last remaining instrumentatation related structure
that needs to be migrate to use the centralized template
definition. With this change, instrumentation code
related to coverage module header will be kept in sync
with the coverage mapping reader. The remaining code
which makes implicit assumption about covmap control
structure layout in the the lowering pass will cleaned
up in a different patch. This patch is not intended to
have no functional change.
llvm-svn: 256714
(test case update)
Profile symbols have long prefixes which waste space and creating pressure for linker.
This patch shortens the prefixes to minimal length without losing verbosity.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D15503
llvm-svn: 255576
The profile data format was recently updated and the new indexing api
requires the code coverage tool to know the function's hash as well
as the function's name to get the execution counts for a function.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4995
llvm-svn: 216208
This patch adds the tests for the coverage mapping generation.
Most of the tests check the mapping regions produced by
the generator, and one checks the llvm IR.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4847
llvm-svn: 215995
I reverted one of the added tests from r215261 in r215274, since it
was failing on quite a few bots. It looks like this wasn't sufficient,
as we're still getting failures on windows, like the following:
http://bb.pgr.jp/builders/ninja-x64-msvc-RA-centos6/builds/5378
I'm reverting this entire commit so the bots aren't blocked on these
failures.
This reverts commit r215261.
llvm-svn: 215278
This patch adds the tests for the coverage mapping generation.
Most of the tests check the mapping regions produced by
the generator, and one checks the llvm IR.
Differential Revision: http://reviews.llvm.org/D4793
llvm-svn: 215261
Zequan Wu