Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210111081821.3041587-1-morbo@google.com> <20210407211704.367039-1-morbo@google.com>
 <YMTn9yjuemKFLbws@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAGG=3QXjD1DQjACu=CQQSP=whue-14Pw8FcNcXrJZfLC_E+y9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <YMT5xZsZMX0PpDKQ@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAGG=3QVHkkJ236mCJ8Jt_6JtgYtWHV9b4aVXnoj6ypc7GOnc0A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20210612202505.GG68208@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAGG=3QUZ9tXGNLhbOr+AFDTJABDujZuaG1mYaLKdTcJZguEDWw@mail.gmail.com>
 <YMca2aa+t+3VrpN9@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAGG=3QVPCuAx9UMTOzQp+8MJk8KVyOfaYeV0yehpVwbCaYMVpg@mail.gmail.com>
 <YMczJGPsxSWNgJMG@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <YMczJGPsxSWNgJMG@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Jun 2021 04:41:01 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGG=3QVqbuhocgx0sJmqEkTkHo0Q=K5+7+2X6ONvcX7cVZc1+w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9] pgo: add clang's Profile Guided Optimization infrastructure
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@google.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
        Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@googlegroups.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@gmail.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
        Fangrui Song <maskray@google.com>,
        "maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@kernel.org>,
        andreyknvl@gmail.com, dvyukov@google.com, elver@google.com,
        johannes.berg@intel.com, oberpar@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
        linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 3:45 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 02:39:41AM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 2:01 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>
> > > Because having GCOV, KCOV and PGO all do essentially the same thing
> > > differently, makes heaps of sense?
> > >
> > It does when you're dealing with one toolchain without access to another.
>
> Here's a sekrit, don't tell anyone, but you can get a free copy of GCC
> right here:
>
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/
>
> We also have this linux-toolchains list (Cc'ed now) that contains folks
> from both sides.
>
Your sarcasm is not useful.

> > > I understand that the compilers actually generates radically different
> > > instrumentation for the various cases, but essentially they're all
> > > collecting (function/branch) arcs.
> > >
> > That's true, but there's no one format for profiling data that's
> > usable between all compilers. I'm not even sure there's a good way to
> > translate between, say, gcov and llvm's format. To make matters more
> > complicated, each compiler's format is tightly coupled to a specific
> > version of that compiler. And depending on *how* the data is collected
> > (e.g. sampling or instrumentation), it may not give us the full
> > benefit of FDO/PGO.
>
> I'm thinking that something simple like:
>
> struct arc {
>         u64     from;
>         u64     to;
>         u64     nr;
>         u64     cntrs[0];
> };
>
> goes a very long way. Stick a header on that says how large cntrs[] is,
> and some other data (like load offset and whatnot) and you should be
> good.
>
> Combine that with the executable image (say /proc/kcore) to recover
> what's @from (call, jmp or conditional branch) and I'm thinking one
> ought to be able to construct lots of useful data.
>
> I've also been led to believe that the KCOV data format is not in fact
> dependent on which toolchain is used.
>
> > > I'm thinking it might be about time to build _one_ infrastructure for
> > > that and define a kernel arc format and call it a day.
> > >
> > That may be nice, but it's a rather large request.
>
> Given GCOV just died, perhaps you can look at what KCOV does and see if
> that can be extended to do as you want. KCOV is actively used and
> we actually tripped over all the fun little noinstr bugs at the time.