Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAKwvOdkyY9rsH3eViMK-_4iz_W_usumz5nD+3AhbNCVQ3FRCjA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKwvOdnsZekEM77axBf67MDqQVP0n6PTKH=njSyPSWTNiWAOiA@mail.gmail.com>
 <87mtf7z0rt.fsf@gnu.org> <6F9E9D93-3913-4022-9384-D809C8EF7715@oracle.com>
 <CAKwvOdm=_YqBpuBzouqoWHYNe6MMUE10vqF0PUkU=hcOj+UqrQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <B0A01DE7-1B50-479A-92DF-DAFAB3F06E0F@oracle.com> <878rpgpvfj.fsf@gnu.org>
 <Yr638aOIaaEBPICy@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> <CAGG=3QWbW-Dang49Jx3fyNExWtL8syuMkMJmcPHA7J25cHQ0zw@mail.gmail.com>
 <Yr7fMre18pUMz9rA@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
In-Reply-To: <Yr7fMre18pUMz9rA@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
From:   Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:57:25 -0700
Message-ID: <CAGG=3QUA8BnhN9QaJao6nH6EyNks0yWO+cWWyvE0pJbOUm+cMw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: plumbers session on profiling?
To:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc:     "Jose E. Marchesi" <jemarch@gnu.org>,
        Ruud van der Pas <ruud.vanderpas@oracle.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
        Vladimir Mezentsev <vladimir.mezentsev@oracle.com>,
        clang-built-linux <llvm@lists.linux.dev>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        Wenlei He <wenlei@fb.com>, Hongtao Yu <hoy@fb.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        linux-toolchains <linux-toolchains@vger.kernel.org>,
        elena.zannoni@oracle.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 4:49 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 03:17:54AM -0700, Bill Wendling wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 1, 2022 at 2:02 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 07:08:48PM +0200, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
> > > >
> > > > [Added linux-toolchains@vger in CC]
> > > >
> > > > It would be interesting to have some discussion in the Toolchains track
> > > > on building the kernel with PGO/FDO.  I have seen a raise on interest on
> > > > the topic in several companies, but it would make very little sense if
> > > > no kernel hacker is interested in participating... anybody?
> > >
> > > I know there's been a lot of work in this area, but none of it seems to
> > > have trickled down to be easy enough for me to use it.
> >
> > We use an instrumented kernel to collect the data we need. It gives us
> > the best payoff, because the profiling data is more fine-grained and
> > accurate. (PGO does much more than make inlining decisions.)
> >
> > If I recall correctly, you previously suggested using sampling data.
> > (Correct?) Is there a document or article that outlines that process?
>
> IIRC Google has LBR sample driven PGO somewhere as well. ISTR that being
> the whole motivation for that gruesome Zen3 BRS hack.
>
> Google got me this: https://research.google.com/pubs/archive/45290.pdf
>
Right. However, there's a chicken-and-egg issue with AutoFDO for the
production kernel. We can't release a kernel that hasn't been compiled
with PGO/FDO. We could only release it in a test environment, in which
case we could use AutoFDO. However, the document says that AutoFDO
only reaches ~90% of FDO. They list some reasons for this, but
nonetheless I suspect that the delta would be too severe for us to
release the kernel.

As for LBR, that will work with Intel/AMD, but I thought that LBR
doesn't exist for Arm processors (my knowledge could be out of date on
this).

What would make PGO (sample-based or instrumented) easy enough for you
to use? What're the key elements missing?

-bw