Summary:
The diff looks scary but it really isn't:
1. I moved the check for the number of measurements into `SchedClassClusterCentroid::validate()`
2. While there, added a check that we can only have a single inverse throughput measurement. I missed that when adding it initially.
3. In `Analysis::SchedClassCluster::measurementsMatch()` is called with the current LLVM values from schedule class and the values from Centroid.
3.1. The values from centroid we can already get from `SchedClassClusterCentroid::getAsPoint()`.
This isn't 100% a NFC, because previously for inverse throughput we used `min()`. I have asked whether i have done that correctly in
https://reviews.llvm.org/D57647?id=184939#inline-510384 but did not hear back. I think `avg()` should be used too, thus it is a fix.
3.2. Finally, refactor the computation of the LLVM-specified values into `Analysis::SchedClassCluster::getSchedClassPoint()`
I will need that function for [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41275 | PR41275 ]]
Reviewers: courbet, gchatelet
Reviewed By: courbet
Subscribers: tschuett, jdoerfert, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59951
llvm-svn: 357245
Summary:
This is an alternative to D59539.
Let's suppose we have measured 4 different opcodes, and got: `0.5`, `1.0`, `1.5`, `2.0`.
Let's suppose we are using `-analysis-clustering-epsilon=0.5`.
By default now we will start processing the `0.5` point, find that `1.0` is it's neighbor, add them to a new cluster.
Then we will notice that `1.5` is a neighbor of `1.0` and add it to that same cluster.
Then we will notice that `2.0` is a neighbor of `1.5` and add it to that same cluster.
So all these points ended up in the same cluster.
This may or may not be a correct implementation of dbscan clustering algorithm.
But this is rather horribly broken for the reasons of comparing the clusters with the LLVM sched data.
Let's suppose all those opcodes are currently in the same sched cluster.
If i specify `-analysis-inconsistency-epsilon=0.5`, then no matter
the LLVM values this cluster will **never** match the LLVM values,
and thus this cluster will **always** be displayed as inconsistent.
The solution is obviously to split off some of these opcodes into different sched cluster.
But how do i do that? Out of 4 opcodes displayed in the inconsistency report,
which ones are the "bad ones"? Which ones are the most different from the checked-in data?
I'd need to go in to the `.yaml` and look it up manually.
The trivial solution is to, when creating clusters, don't use the full dbscan algorithm,
but instead "pick some unclustered point, pick all unclustered points that are it's neighbor,
put them all into a new cluster, repeat". And just so as it happens, we can arrive
at that algorithm by not performing the "add neighbors of a neighbor to the cluster" step.
But that won't work well once we teach analyze mode to operate in on-1D mode
(i.e. on more than a single measurement type at a time), because the clustering would
depend on the order of the measurements.
Instead, let's just create a single cluster per opcode, and put all the points of that opcode into said cluster.
And simultaneously check that every point in that cluster is a neighbor of every other point in the cluster,
and if they are not, the cluster (==opcode) is unstable.
This is //yet another// step to bring me closer to being able to continue cleanup of bdver2 sched model..
Fixes [[ https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40880 | PR40880 ]].
Reviewers: courbet, gchatelet
Reviewed By: courbet
Subscribers: tschuett, jdoerfert, RKSimon, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D59820
llvm-svn: 357152
to reflect the new license.
We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header
entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the
Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach.
Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM
project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers
include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed
code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of
our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and
repository.
llvm-svn: 351636
Summary:
As it was pointed out in D54388+D54390, the maximal size of `Neighbors` is known,
it will contain at most Points_.size() minus one (the center of the cluster)
While that is the upper bound, meaning in the most cases, the actual count
will be much smaller, since D54390 made the allocation persistent,
we no longer have to worry about overly-optimistically `reserve()`ing.
Old: (D54393)
```
Performance counter stats for './bin/llvm-exegesis -mode=analysis -analysis-epsilon=100000 -benchmarks-file=/tmp/benchmarks.yaml -analysis-inconsistencies-output-file=/tmp/clusters.html' (16 runs):
6553.167456 task-clock (msec) # 1.000 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.21% )
...
6.5547 +- 0.0134 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.20% )
```
New:
```
Performance counter stats for './bin/llvm-exegesis -mode=analysis -analysis-epsilon=100000 -benchmarks-file=/tmp/benchmarks.yaml -analysis-inconsistencies-output-file=/tmp/clusters.html' (16 runs):
6315.057872 task-clock (msec) # 0.999 CPUs utilized ( +- 0.24% )
...
6.3187 +- 0.0160 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.25% )
```
And that is another -~4%.
Since this is the last (as of this moment) patch in this patch series,
it is a good time to summarize:
Old: (svn trunk, as stated in D54381)
```
$ time ./bin/llvm-exegesis -mode=analysis -analysis-epsilon=100000 -benchmarks-file=/tmp/benchmarks.yaml -analysis-inconsistencies-output-file=/tmp/clusters.html &> /dev/null
real 0m24.884s
user 0m24.099s
sys 0m0.785s
```
So these patches, on a given benchmark,
has decreased llvm-exegesis analysis time by 74.62%.
There surely is more room for further improvements.
D54514 may improve thins by -11.5% more (relative to this patch).
Parallelization may improve things further significantly, too.
Reviewers: courbet, MaskRay, RKSimon, gchatelet, john.brawn
Reviewed By: courbet, MaskRay
Subscribers: tschuett, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54415
llvm-svn: 347204
Summary:
This allows simplifying references of llvm::foo with foo when the needs
come in the future.
Reviewers: courbet, gchatelet
Reviewed By: gchatelet
Subscribers: javed.absar, tschuett, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D53455
llvm-svn: 344922
Summary:
We now highlight any sched classes whose measurements do not match the
LLVM SchedModel. "bad" clusters are marked in red.
Screenshot in phabricator diff.
Reviewers: gchatelet
Subscribers: tschuett, mgrang, RKSimon, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47639
llvm-svn: 333884
Summary: This makes the report much more readable.
Reviewers: gchatelet
Subscribers: tschuett, mgrang, craig.topper, RKSimon, llvm-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47189
llvm-svn: 332979
Summary:
The analysis mode gives the user a clustered view of the measurement results.
Next steps are (requires the split ok AsmTemplate.Name into {mnemonic, mode}):
- Show the sched class.
- Highlight any inconsistencies with the checked-in data.
Reviewers: gchatelet
Subscribers: mgorny, llvm-commits, tschuett
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46865
llvm-svn: 332344
The analysis mode gives the user a clustered view of the measurement results and
highlights any inconsistencies with the checked-in data.
llvm-svn: 332229
