Re: [PATCH 0/6] Add AutoFDO and Propeller support for Clang build

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 1:51 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2024 at 01:29:53PM -0700, Rong Xu wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > This patch series is to integrate AutoFDO and Propeller support into
> > the Linux kernel. AutoFDO is a profile-guided optimization technique
> > that leverages hardware sampling to enhance binary performance.
> > Unlike Instrumentation-based FDO (iFDO), AutoFDO offers a user-friendly
> > and straightforward application process. While iFDO generally yields
> > superior profile quality and performance, our findings reveal that
> > AutoFDO achieves remarkable effectiveness, bringing performance close
> > to iFDO for benchmark applications. Similar to AutoFDO, Propeller too
> > utilizes hardware sampling to collect profiles and apply post-link
> > optimizations to improve the benchmark’s performance over and above
> > AutoFDO.
> >
> > Our empirical data demonstrates significant performance improvements
> > with AutoFDO and Propeller, up to 10% on microbenchmarks and up to 5%
> > on large warehouse-scale benchmarks. This makes a strong case for their
> > inclusion as supported features in the upstream kernel.
> >
> > Background
> >
> > A significant fraction of fleet processing cycles (excluding idle time)
> > from data center workloads are attributable to the kernel. Ware-house
> > scale workloads maximize performance by optimizing the production kernel
> > using iFDO (a.k.a instrumented PGO, Profile Guided Optimization).
> >
> > iFDO can significantly enhance application performance but its use
> > within the kernel has raised concerns. AutoFDO is a variant of FDO that
> > uses the hardware’s Performance Monitoring Unit (PMU) to collect
> > profiling data. While AutoFDO typically yields smaller performance
> > gains than iFDO, it presents unique benefits for optimizing kernels.
> >
> > AutoFDO eliminates the need for instrumented kernels, allowing a single
> > optimized kernel to serve both execution and profile collection. It also
> > minimizes slowdown during profile collection, potentially yielding
> > higher-fidelity profiling, especially for time-sensitive code, compared
> > to iFDO. Additionally, AutoFDO profiles can be obtained from production
> > environments via the hardware’s PMU whereas iFDO profiles require
> > carefully curated load tests that are representative of real-world
> > traffic.
> >
> > AutoFDO facilitates profile collection across diverse targets.
> > Preliminary studies indicate significant variation in kernel hot spots
> > within Google’s infrastructure, suggesting potential performance gains
> > through target-specific kernel customization.
> >
> > Furthermore, other advanced compiler optimization techniques, including
> > ThinLTO and Propeller can be stacked on top of AutoFDO, similar to iFDO.
> > ThinLTO achieves better runtime performance through whole-program
> > analysis and cross module optimizations. The main difference between
> > traditional LTO and ThinLTO is that the latter is scalable in time and
> > memory.
>
> This,
>
> > Propeller is a profile-guided, post-link optimizer that improves
> > the performance of large-scale applications compiled with LLVM. It
> > operates by relinking the binary based on an additional round of runtime
> > profiles, enabling precise optimizations that are not possible at
> > compile time.
>
> should be on top somewhere, not hidden away inside a giant wall of text
> somewhere at the end.

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll move it up. Maybe after the first
paragraph in Background.

Sorry if you received a duplicated message -- I'm resending this in
plain text mode.

-Rong





[Index of Archives]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [ECOS]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]

  Powered by Linux