Linker dependency framework - #101277

Merged
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework
May 6, 2024
Merged

Linker dependency framework#101277
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework

Conversation

@jtschuster

@jtschusterjtschuster commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.

@jtschusterjtschuster added NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 19, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @agocke, @MichalStrehovsky, @jkotas
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment on lines +465 to +468
protected override void OnMarked (MarkStepNodeFactory context)
{
markStep.MarkTypeImpl (reference, reason, origin);
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know enough of the DF to tell if this is the right place to do the heavy processing. But I guess for now it is.
I assume eventually all of this would move to GetDependencies and we would remove OnMarked, right?

Future thought: Try to figure out how the DF will play with Annotations and the notion of "marked item" which is used outside of the mark step in the trimmer.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think ideally most of this moves to GetDependencies and this is minimal or removed.

My thought is that eventually the Annotations markings will forward to the analyzer markings, but that could get complicated if marking (not just IsMarked checks) happen outside of MarkStep. In the meantime, I think OnMarked will call Annotations.MarkX.

var parameter = parameters[i];

TypeDefinition? argumentTypeDef = MarkType (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));
var argumentTypeDef = MarkTypeImpl (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the place where it gets interesting for TypeRef versus TypeDef :-)

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Mono.Linker.csproj Outdated
@jtschusterjtschuster removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 22, 2024
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.ProcessCallbackNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.TypeDefinitionNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
if (CheckProcessed (type))
return type;

if (type.HasMethods) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm curious why this moved - at first glance it looks like it better belongs in ProcessType since it should happen just once per type definition.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Originally I moved it up because it relied on the DependencyInfo, but I think that can condition can be removed and moved back to ProcessMethod. I think the check on the DependencyKind was only to prevent infinite recursion when marking cctors, which we won't hit with the dependency analyzer.

protected override string GetName (NodeFactory context) => $"{type.GetDisplayName()} is relevant to variant casting";
protected override void OnMarked (NodeFactory context)
{
context.MarkStep.Annotations.MarkRelevantToVariantCasting (type);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we use OnMarked vs GetStaticDependencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just used OnMarked arbitrarily for this since there aren't any dependencies. It looks like OnMarked will do work up front when the node is returned from another GetStaticDependencies, then it's added to a stack to later call GetStaticDependencies.

- Rename dependency analyzer
- Remove empty lines
- Remove methods queue
- Move static ctor marking

@sbomersbomer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you!

@vitek-karas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

@jtschuster

jtschuster commented May 3, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

Yep, it looks like this has about the exact same speed performance. We allocate a bit more for all the Funcs used when producing nodes, but they're short lived and shouldn't impact max working set too much (and we can remove the allocation in a follow up).

Comment threadeng/liveILLink.targets Outdated
@jtschuster
jtschuster requested a review from agockeMay 6, 2024 20:03
@jtschuster
jtschuster merged commit fbb67a6 into dotnet:mainMay 6, 2024
michaelgsharp pushed a commit to michaelgsharp/runtime that referenced this pull request May 9, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
Ruihan-Yin pushed a commit to Ruihan-Yin/runtime that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jtschuster@vitek-karas@sbomer@am11@MichalStrehovsky
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all
 blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks");
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Skip to content

Linker dependency framework - #101277

Merged
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework
May 6, 2024
Merged

Linker dependency framework#101277
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework

Conversation

@jtschuster

@jtschusterjtschuster commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.

@jtschusterjtschuster added NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 19, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @agocke, @MichalStrehovsky, @jkotas
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment on lines +465 to +468
protected override void OnMarked (MarkStepNodeFactory context)
{
markStep.MarkTypeImpl (reference, reason, origin);
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know enough of the DF to tell if this is the right place to do the heavy processing. But I guess for now it is.
I assume eventually all of this would move to GetDependencies and we would remove OnMarked, right?

Future thought: Try to figure out how the DF will play with Annotations and the notion of "marked item" which is used outside of the mark step in the trimmer.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think ideally most of this moves to GetDependencies and this is minimal or removed.

My thought is that eventually the Annotations markings will forward to the analyzer markings, but that could get complicated if marking (not just IsMarked checks) happen outside of MarkStep. In the meantime, I think OnMarked will call Annotations.MarkX.

var parameter = parameters[i];

TypeDefinition? argumentTypeDef = MarkType (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));
var argumentTypeDef = MarkTypeImpl (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the place where it gets interesting for TypeRef versus TypeDef :-)

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Mono.Linker.csproj Outdated
@jtschusterjtschuster removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 22, 2024
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.ProcessCallbackNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.TypeDefinitionNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
if (CheckProcessed (type))
return type;

if (type.HasMethods) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm curious why this moved - at first glance it looks like it better belongs in ProcessType since it should happen just once per type definition.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Originally I moved it up because it relied on the DependencyInfo, but I think that can condition can be removed and moved back to ProcessMethod. I think the check on the DependencyKind was only to prevent infinite recursion when marking cctors, which we won't hit with the dependency analyzer.

protected override string GetName (NodeFactory context) => $"{type.GetDisplayName()} is relevant to variant casting";
protected override void OnMarked (NodeFactory context)
{
context.MarkStep.Annotations.MarkRelevantToVariantCasting (type);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we use OnMarked vs GetStaticDependencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just used OnMarked arbitrarily for this since there aren't any dependencies. It looks like OnMarked will do work up front when the node is returned from another GetStaticDependencies, then it's added to a stack to later call GetStaticDependencies.

- Rename dependency analyzer
- Remove empty lines
- Remove methods queue
- Move static ctor marking

@sbomersbomer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you!

@vitek-karas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

@jtschuster

jtschuster commented May 3, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

Yep, it looks like this has about the exact same speed performance. We allocate a bit more for all the Funcs used when producing nodes, but they're short lived and shouldn't impact max working set too much (and we can remove the allocation in a follow up).

Comment threadeng/liveILLink.targets Outdated
@jtschuster
jtschuster requested a review from agockeMay 6, 2024 20:03
@jtschuster
jtschuster merged commit fbb67a6 into dotnet:mainMay 6, 2024
michaelgsharp pushed a commit to michaelgsharp/runtime that referenced this pull request May 9, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
Ruihan-Yin pushed a commit to Ruihan-Yin/runtime that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jtschuster@vitek-karas@sbomer@am11@MichalStrehovsky
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Linker dependency framework - #101277

Merged
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework
May 6, 2024
Merged

Linker dependency framework#101277
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework

Conversation

@jtschuster

@jtschusterjtschuster commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.

@jtschusterjtschuster added NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 19, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @agocke, @MichalStrehovsky, @jkotas
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment on lines +465 to +468
protected override void OnMarked (MarkStepNodeFactory context)
{
markStep.MarkTypeImpl (reference, reason, origin);
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know enough of the DF to tell if this is the right place to do the heavy processing. But I guess for now it is.
I assume eventually all of this would move to GetDependencies and we would remove OnMarked, right?

Future thought: Try to figure out how the DF will play with Annotations and the notion of "marked item" which is used outside of the mark step in the trimmer.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think ideally most of this moves to GetDependencies and this is minimal or removed.

My thought is that eventually the Annotations markings will forward to the analyzer markings, but that could get complicated if marking (not just IsMarked checks) happen outside of MarkStep. In the meantime, I think OnMarked will call Annotations.MarkX.

var parameter = parameters[i];

TypeDefinition? argumentTypeDef = MarkType (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));
var argumentTypeDef = MarkTypeImpl (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the place where it gets interesting for TypeRef versus TypeDef :-)

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Mono.Linker.csproj Outdated
@jtschusterjtschuster removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 22, 2024
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.ProcessCallbackNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.TypeDefinitionNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
if (CheckProcessed (type))
return type;

if (type.HasMethods) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm curious why this moved - at first glance it looks like it better belongs in ProcessType since it should happen just once per type definition.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Originally I moved it up because it relied on the DependencyInfo, but I think that can condition can be removed and moved back to ProcessMethod. I think the check on the DependencyKind was only to prevent infinite recursion when marking cctors, which we won't hit with the dependency analyzer.

protected override string GetName (NodeFactory context) => $"{type.GetDisplayName()} is relevant to variant casting";
protected override void OnMarked (NodeFactory context)
{
context.MarkStep.Annotations.MarkRelevantToVariantCasting (type);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we use OnMarked vs GetStaticDependencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just used OnMarked arbitrarily for this since there aren't any dependencies. It looks like OnMarked will do work up front when the node is returned from another GetStaticDependencies, then it's added to a stack to later call GetStaticDependencies.

- Rename dependency analyzer
- Remove empty lines
- Remove methods queue
- Move static ctor marking

@sbomersbomer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you!

@vitek-karas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

@jtschuster

jtschuster commented May 3, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

Yep, it looks like this has about the exact same speed performance. We allocate a bit more for all the Funcs used when producing nodes, but they're short lived and shouldn't impact max working set too much (and we can remove the allocation in a follow up).

Comment threadeng/liveILLink.targets Outdated
@jtschuster
jtschuster requested a review from agockeMay 6, 2024 20:03
@jtschuster
jtschuster merged commit fbb67a6 into dotnet:mainMay 6, 2024
michaelgsharp pushed a commit to michaelgsharp/runtime that referenced this pull request May 9, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
Ruihan-Yin pushed a commit to Ruihan-Yin/runtime that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jtschuster@vitek-karas@sbomer@am11@MichalStrehovsky
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Linker dependency framework - #101277

Merged
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework
May 6, 2024
Merged

Linker dependency framework#101277
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework

Conversation

@jtschuster

@jtschusterjtschuster commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.

@jtschusterjtschuster added NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 19, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @agocke, @MichalStrehovsky, @jkotas
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment on lines +465 to +468
protected override void OnMarked (MarkStepNodeFactory context)
{
markStep.MarkTypeImpl (reference, reason, origin);
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know enough of the DF to tell if this is the right place to do the heavy processing. But I guess for now it is.
I assume eventually all of this would move to GetDependencies and we would remove OnMarked, right?

Future thought: Try to figure out how the DF will play with Annotations and the notion of "marked item" which is used outside of the mark step in the trimmer.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think ideally most of this moves to GetDependencies and this is minimal or removed.

My thought is that eventually the Annotations markings will forward to the analyzer markings, but that could get complicated if marking (not just IsMarked checks) happen outside of MarkStep. In the meantime, I think OnMarked will call Annotations.MarkX.

var parameter = parameters[i];

TypeDefinition? argumentTypeDef = MarkType (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));
var argumentTypeDef = MarkTypeImpl (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the place where it gets interesting for TypeRef versus TypeDef :-)

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Mono.Linker.csproj Outdated
@jtschusterjtschuster removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 22, 2024
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.ProcessCallbackNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.TypeDefinitionNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
if (CheckProcessed (type))
return type;

if (type.HasMethods) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm curious why this moved - at first glance it looks like it better belongs in ProcessType since it should happen just once per type definition.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Originally I moved it up because it relied on the DependencyInfo, but I think that can condition can be removed and moved back to ProcessMethod. I think the check on the DependencyKind was only to prevent infinite recursion when marking cctors, which we won't hit with the dependency analyzer.

protected override string GetName (NodeFactory context) => $"{type.GetDisplayName()} is relevant to variant casting";
protected override void OnMarked (NodeFactory context)
{
context.MarkStep.Annotations.MarkRelevantToVariantCasting (type);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we use OnMarked vs GetStaticDependencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just used OnMarked arbitrarily for this since there aren't any dependencies. It looks like OnMarked will do work up front when the node is returned from another GetStaticDependencies, then it's added to a stack to later call GetStaticDependencies.

- Rename dependency analyzer
- Remove empty lines
- Remove methods queue
- Move static ctor marking

@sbomersbomer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you!

@vitek-karas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

@jtschuster

jtschuster commented May 3, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

Yep, it looks like this has about the exact same speed performance. We allocate a bit more for all the Funcs used when producing nodes, but they're short lived and shouldn't impact max working set too much (and we can remove the allocation in a follow up).

Comment threadeng/liveILLink.targets Outdated
@jtschuster
jtschuster requested a review from agockeMay 6, 2024 20:03
@jtschuster
jtschuster merged commit fbb67a6 into dotnet:mainMay 6, 2024
michaelgsharp pushed a commit to michaelgsharp/runtime that referenced this pull request May 9, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
Ruihan-Yin pushed a commit to Ruihan-Yin/runtime that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jtschuster@vitek-karas@sbomer@am11@MichalStrehovsky
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Skip to content

Linker dependency framework - #101277

Merged
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework
May 6, 2024
Merged

Linker dependency framework#101277
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework

Conversation

@jtschuster

@jtschusterjtschuster commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.

@jtschusterjtschuster added NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 19, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @agocke, @MichalStrehovsky, @jkotas
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment on lines +465 to +468
protected override void OnMarked (MarkStepNodeFactory context)
{
markStep.MarkTypeImpl (reference, reason, origin);
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know enough of the DF to tell if this is the right place to do the heavy processing. But I guess for now it is.
I assume eventually all of this would move to GetDependencies and we would remove OnMarked, right?

Future thought: Try to figure out how the DF will play with Annotations and the notion of "marked item" which is used outside of the mark step in the trimmer.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think ideally most of this moves to GetDependencies and this is minimal or removed.

My thought is that eventually the Annotations markings will forward to the analyzer markings, but that could get complicated if marking (not just IsMarked checks) happen outside of MarkStep. In the meantime, I think OnMarked will call Annotations.MarkX.

var parameter = parameters[i];

TypeDefinition? argumentTypeDef = MarkType (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));
var argumentTypeDef = MarkTypeImpl (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the place where it gets interesting for TypeRef versus TypeDef :-)

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Mono.Linker.csproj Outdated
@jtschusterjtschuster removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 22, 2024
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.ProcessCallbackNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.TypeDefinitionNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
if (CheckProcessed (type))
return type;

if (type.HasMethods) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm curious why this moved - at first glance it looks like it better belongs in ProcessType since it should happen just once per type definition.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Originally I moved it up because it relied on the DependencyInfo, but I think that can condition can be removed and moved back to ProcessMethod. I think the check on the DependencyKind was only to prevent infinite recursion when marking cctors, which we won't hit with the dependency analyzer.

protected override string GetName (NodeFactory context) => $"{type.GetDisplayName()} is relevant to variant casting";
protected override void OnMarked (NodeFactory context)
{
context.MarkStep.Annotations.MarkRelevantToVariantCasting (type);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we use OnMarked vs GetStaticDependencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just used OnMarked arbitrarily for this since there aren't any dependencies. It looks like OnMarked will do work up front when the node is returned from another GetStaticDependencies, then it's added to a stack to later call GetStaticDependencies.

- Rename dependency analyzer
- Remove empty lines
- Remove methods queue
- Move static ctor marking

@sbomersbomer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you!

@vitek-karas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

@jtschuster

jtschuster commented May 3, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

Yep, it looks like this has about the exact same speed performance. We allocate a bit more for all the Funcs used when producing nodes, but they're short lived and shouldn't impact max working set too much (and we can remove the allocation in a follow up).

Comment threadeng/liveILLink.targets Outdated
@jtschuster
jtschuster requested a review from agockeMay 6, 2024 20:03
@jtschuster
jtschuster merged commit fbb67a6 into dotnet:mainMay 6, 2024
michaelgsharp pushed a commit to michaelgsharp/runtime that referenced this pull request May 9, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
Ruihan-Yin pushed a commit to Ruihan-Yin/runtime that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jtschuster@vitek-karas@sbomer@am11@MichalStrehovsky
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Linker dependency framework - #101277

Merged
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework
May 6, 2024
Merged

Linker dependency framework#101277
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework

Conversation

@jtschuster

@jtschusterjtschuster commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.

@jtschusterjtschuster added NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 19, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @agocke, @MichalStrehovsky, @jkotas
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment on lines +465 to +468
protected override void OnMarked (MarkStepNodeFactory context)
{
markStep.MarkTypeImpl (reference, reason, origin);
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know enough of the DF to tell if this is the right place to do the heavy processing. But I guess for now it is.
I assume eventually all of this would move to GetDependencies and we would remove OnMarked, right?

Future thought: Try to figure out how the DF will play with Annotations and the notion of "marked item" which is used outside of the mark step in the trimmer.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think ideally most of this moves to GetDependencies and this is minimal or removed.

My thought is that eventually the Annotations markings will forward to the analyzer markings, but that could get complicated if marking (not just IsMarked checks) happen outside of MarkStep. In the meantime, I think OnMarked will call Annotations.MarkX.

var parameter = parameters[i];

TypeDefinition? argumentTypeDef = MarkType (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));
var argumentTypeDef = MarkTypeImpl (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the place where it gets interesting for TypeRef versus TypeDef :-)

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Mono.Linker.csproj Outdated
@jtschusterjtschuster removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 22, 2024
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.ProcessCallbackNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.TypeDefinitionNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
if (CheckProcessed (type))
return type;

if (type.HasMethods) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm curious why this moved - at first glance it looks like it better belongs in ProcessType since it should happen just once per type definition.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Originally I moved it up because it relied on the DependencyInfo, but I think that can condition can be removed and moved back to ProcessMethod. I think the check on the DependencyKind was only to prevent infinite recursion when marking cctors, which we won't hit with the dependency analyzer.

protected override string GetName (NodeFactory context) => $"{type.GetDisplayName()} is relevant to variant casting";
protected override void OnMarked (NodeFactory context)
{
context.MarkStep.Annotations.MarkRelevantToVariantCasting (type);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we use OnMarked vs GetStaticDependencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just used OnMarked arbitrarily for this since there aren't any dependencies. It looks like OnMarked will do work up front when the node is returned from another GetStaticDependencies, then it's added to a stack to later call GetStaticDependencies.

- Rename dependency analyzer
- Remove empty lines
- Remove methods queue
- Move static ctor marking

@sbomersbomer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you!

@vitek-karas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

@jtschuster

jtschuster commented May 3, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

Yep, it looks like this has about the exact same speed performance. We allocate a bit more for all the Funcs used when producing nodes, but they're short lived and shouldn't impact max working set too much (and we can remove the allocation in a follow up).

Comment threadeng/liveILLink.targets Outdated
@jtschuster
jtschuster requested a review from agockeMay 6, 2024 20:03
@jtschuster
jtschuster merged commit fbb67a6 into dotnet:mainMay 6, 2024
michaelgsharp pushed a commit to michaelgsharp/runtime that referenced this pull request May 9, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
Ruihan-Yin pushed a commit to Ruihan-Yin/runtime that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jtschuster@vitek-karas@sbomer@am11@MichalStrehovsky
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

Linker dependency framework - #101277

Merged
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework
May 6, 2024
Merged

Linker dependency framework#101277
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework

Conversation

@jtschuster

@jtschusterjtschuster commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.

@jtschusterjtschuster added NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 19, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @agocke, @MichalStrehovsky, @jkotas
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment on lines +465 to +468
protected override void OnMarked (MarkStepNodeFactory context)
{
markStep.MarkTypeImpl (reference, reason, origin);
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know enough of the DF to tell if this is the right place to do the heavy processing. But I guess for now it is.
I assume eventually all of this would move to GetDependencies and we would remove OnMarked, right?

Future thought: Try to figure out how the DF will play with Annotations and the notion of "marked item" which is used outside of the mark step in the trimmer.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think ideally most of this moves to GetDependencies and this is minimal or removed.

My thought is that eventually the Annotations markings will forward to the analyzer markings, but that could get complicated if marking (not just IsMarked checks) happen outside of MarkStep. In the meantime, I think OnMarked will call Annotations.MarkX.

var parameter = parameters[i];

TypeDefinition? argumentTypeDef = MarkType (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));
var argumentTypeDef = MarkTypeImpl (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the place where it gets interesting for TypeRef versus TypeDef :-)

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Mono.Linker.csproj Outdated
@jtschusterjtschuster removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 22, 2024
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.ProcessCallbackNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.TypeDefinitionNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
if (CheckProcessed (type))
return type;

if (type.HasMethods) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm curious why this moved - at first glance it looks like it better belongs in ProcessType since it should happen just once per type definition.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Originally I moved it up because it relied on the DependencyInfo, but I think that can condition can be removed and moved back to ProcessMethod. I think the check on the DependencyKind was only to prevent infinite recursion when marking cctors, which we won't hit with the dependency analyzer.

protected override string GetName (NodeFactory context) => $"{type.GetDisplayName()} is relevant to variant casting";
protected override void OnMarked (NodeFactory context)
{
context.MarkStep.Annotations.MarkRelevantToVariantCasting (type);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we use OnMarked vs GetStaticDependencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just used OnMarked arbitrarily for this since there aren't any dependencies. It looks like OnMarked will do work up front when the node is returned from another GetStaticDependencies, then it's added to a stack to later call GetStaticDependencies.

- Rename dependency analyzer
- Remove empty lines
- Remove methods queue
- Move static ctor marking

@sbomersbomer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you!

@vitek-karas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

@jtschuster

jtschuster commented May 3, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

Yep, it looks like this has about the exact same speed performance. We allocate a bit more for all the Funcs used when producing nodes, but they're short lived and shouldn't impact max working set too much (and we can remove the allocation in a follow up).

Comment threadeng/liveILLink.targets Outdated
@jtschuster
jtschuster requested a review from agockeMay 6, 2024 20:03
@jtschuster
jtschuster merged commit fbb67a6 into dotnet:mainMay 6, 2024
michaelgsharp pushed a commit to michaelgsharp/runtime that referenced this pull request May 9, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
Ruihan-Yin pushed a commit to Ruihan-Yin/runtime that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jtschuster@vitek-karas@sbomer@am11@MichalStrehovsky
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
Skip to content

Linker dependency framework - #101277

Merged
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework
May 6, 2024
Merged

Linker dependency framework#101277
jtschuster merged 42 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
jtschuster:LinkerDependencyFramework

Conversation

@jtschuster

@jtschusterjtschuster commented Apr 19, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.

@jtschusterjtschuster added NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 19, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @agocke, @MichalStrehovsky, @jkotas
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment on lines +465 to +468
protected override void OnMarked (MarkStepNodeFactory context)
{
markStep.MarkTypeImpl (reference, reason, origin);
}

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't know enough of the DF to tell if this is the right place to do the heavy processing. But I guess for now it is.
I assume eventually all of this would move to GetDependencies and we would remove OnMarked, right?

Future thought: Try to figure out how the DF will play with Annotations and the notion of "marked item" which is used outside of the mark step in the trimmer.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, I think ideally most of this moves to GetDependencies and this is minimal or removed.

My thought is that eventually the Annotations markings will forward to the analyzer markings, but that could get complicated if marking (not just IsMarked checks) happen outside of MarkStep. In the meantime, I think OnMarked will call Annotations.MarkX.

var parameter = parameters[i];

TypeDefinition? argumentTypeDef = MarkType (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));
var argumentTypeDef = MarkTypeImpl (argument, new DependencyInfo (DependencyKind.GenericArgumentType, instance));

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the place where it gets interesting for TypeRef versus TypeDef :-)

Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Mono.Linker.csproj Outdated
@jtschusterjtschuster removed NO-MERGE The PR is not ready for merge yet (see discussion for detailed reasons) NO-REVIEW Experimental/testing PR, do NOT review it labels Apr 22, 2024
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.ProcessCallbackNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.TypeDefinitionNode.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
Comment threadsrc/tools/illink/src/linker/Linker.Steps/MarkStep.cs Outdated
if (CheckProcessed (type))
return type;

if (type.HasMethods) {

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm curious why this moved - at first glance it looks like it better belongs in ProcessType since it should happen just once per type definition.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Originally I moved it up because it relied on the DependencyInfo, but I think that can condition can be removed and moved back to ProcessMethod. I think the check on the DependencyKind was only to prevent infinite recursion when marking cctors, which we won't hit with the dependency analyzer.

protected override string GetName (NodeFactory context) => $"{type.GetDisplayName()} is relevant to variant casting";
protected override void OnMarked (NodeFactory context)
{
context.MarkStep.Annotations.MarkRelevantToVariantCasting (type);

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When do we use OnMarked vs GetStaticDependencies?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just used OnMarked arbitrarily for this since there aren't any dependencies. It looks like OnMarked will do work up front when the node is returned from another GetStaticDependencies, then it's added to a stack to later call GetStaticDependencies.

- Rename dependency analyzer
- Remove empty lines
- Remove methods queue
- Move static ctor marking

@sbomersbomer left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you!

@vitek-karas

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

@jtschuster

jtschuster commented May 3, 2024

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

Did you try a simple perf measurement? I don't expect to see noticeable difference, but it does change how the main loop works... ;-)

Yep, it looks like this has about the exact same speed performance. We allocate a bit more for all the Funcs used when producing nodes, but they're short lived and shouldn't impact max working set too much (and we can remove the allocation in a follow up).

Comment threadeng/liveILLink.targets Outdated
@jtschuster
jtschuster requested a review from agockeMay 6, 2024 20:03
@jtschuster
jtschuster merged commit fbb67a6 into dotnet:mainMay 6, 2024
michaelgsharp pushed a commit to michaelgsharp/runtime that referenced this pull request May 9, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
Ruihan-Yin pushed a commit to Ruihan-Yin/runtime that referenced this pull request May 30, 2024
Recreates the Process() loop in MarkStep with node that depends on a new copy of itself when the loop needs to be rerun. Within the loop, the new Method and Type nodes are added to the dependency framework analyzer as roots when MarkMethod and MarkType are called, which leads to the OnMarked methods to be called, which forwards to the ProcessType/Method method in MarkStep. The dependency analyzer doesn't do anything interesting yet. In a follow-up I'll move dependencies from the MarkX and ProcessX methods to the DependencyNode types.
Makes ILCompiler.DependencyAnalysisFramework output path independent of target architecture. Removes TargetArchitecture and TargetOS from ILLink.Tasks project references.
---------
Co-authored-by: vitek-karas <10670590+vitek-karas@users.noreply.github.com>
@github-actionsgithub-actionsBot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

@jtschuster@vitek-karas@sbomer@am11@MichalStrehovsky