Spmi replay pipeline - #56871

Merged
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Aug 11, 2021
Merged

Spmi replay pipeline#56871
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom
kunalspathak:spmi-replay

Conversation

@kunalspathak

@kunalspathakkunalspathak commented Aug 4, 2021•
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Introduce superpmi-replay public pipeline that will be triggered after JIT changes. Here is how it works:

  1. It will perform windowx-x64 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:
    • clrjit_win_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_win_arm64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm64_x64.dll
  2. It will perform windowx-x86 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:
    • clrjit_win_x86_x86.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm_x86.dll
  3. It will spawn 6 machines corresponding to the 6 configurations about to run superpmi replay for below environment variables:
    • "JitStressRegs=0" (default - no flags)
    • "JitStressRegs=1"
    • "JitStressRegs=2"
    • "JitStressRegs=3"
    • "JitStressRegs=4"
    • "JitStressRegs=8"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x10"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x80"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x1000"
  4. In each of the 6 runs, it will download all the collections corresponding to the OS/architecture and do replay for each of the flags and upload a consolidated superpmi__arch.log as an artifact. Currently the pipeline fails because of a bug in helix tracked by https://github.com/dotnet/core-eng/issues/13983.

Changes:

  • Add superpmi-replay public pipeline
  • Added option for --no_progress in "superpmi download" so we do not see the progress logs during mch downloading.
  • Added a template of download-specific-artifacts.yml.

Since I have introduced superpmi-replay** files, I will submit a follow-up PR to rename existing superpmi* files that does the collection to superpmi-collect**.

Also, as a follow-up work, we would trigger this pipeline after superpmi-collect pipeline completes so the collection are fresh and we don't get "missing key errors".

Fixes: #52392

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Aug 4, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak changed the title Spmi replaySpmi replay pipelineAug 5, 2021
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak marked this pull request as ready for review August 5, 2021 16:27
@kunalspathak

kunalspathak commented Aug 5, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

@dotnet/jit-contrib

@kunalspathak

kunalspathak commented Aug 11, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

Can someone review this? Want to make sure that this goes in before we freeze the main.

echesakov
echesakov reviewed Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml Outdated
echesakov
echesakov reviewed Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml Outdated

@echesakovechesakovAug 11, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
- ${{ if eq(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts, false) }}:
- ${{ if not(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts) }}:

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml Outdated
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml Outdated
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-job.yml Outdated
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-replay-job.yml Outdated
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml Outdated
@ghost

ghost commented Aug 11, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Hello @kunalspathak!

Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.

p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.

briansull
briansull approved these changes Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes

@briansullbriansull left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks Good to Me

@ghost
ghost merged commit 0812322 into dotnet:mainAug 11, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak mentioned this pull request Aug 13, 2021
Merged
@BruceForstall

BruceForstall commented Aug 25, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@kunalspathak Love this work!

Are you planning to move the pipeline from internal to public, so it can be auto-triggered or manually triggered on JIT PR's? Or is there some reason why it must remain on "internal" and run post-merge?

@kunalspathak

kunalspathak commented Aug 25, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor

We could definitely make it public but there is one scenario in which it doesn't work - If the PR changes the JITEE guid, then we don't get new collection for new guid because we haven't collected it. What should ideally happen in such cases is that collection pipeline should trigger the replay pipeline. But other than that, this can be moved to public (let me know if you plan on doing it).

@BruceForstall

BruceForstall commented Aug 26, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
  1. The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
  2. Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?

@kunalspathak

kunalspathak commented Aug 26, 2021

Copy link
Copy Markdown
ContributorAuthor
  • The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.

Currently, the partitions are hardcoded in superpmi-replay.proj. Further splitting based on collection would definitely reduce the run time, but the list in below file will grow (no. of collection X 6 entries), but is definitely do-able.

runtime/src/coreclr/scripts/superpmi-replay.proj

Lines 45 to 55 in 7994e59

<ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x64'">
<SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x64"Platform="windows"Architecture="x64" />
<SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-arm64"Platform="windows"Architecture="arm64" />
<SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-x64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="x64" />
<SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm64" />
</ItemGroup>
<ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x86'">
<SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x86"Platform="windows"Architecture="x86" />
<SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm" />
</ItemGroup>

  • Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?

I didn't see any assert yet. The pipeline failed once and reported when we didn't had .mch files to run on.

This was referenced Sep 22, 2021
Closed
Closed
Closed
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 25, 2021
This pull request was closed.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

2 more reviewers
@echesakovechesakovechesakov left review comments
@briansullbriansullbriansull approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclrCLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create SuperPMI replay job

4 participants

@kunalspathak@BruceForstall@echesakov@briansull
, '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
Spmi replay pipeline - #56871
Merged
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Aug 11, 2021
Merged
Spmi replay pipeline#56871
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Aug 4, 2021•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Introduce superpmi-replay public pipeline that will be triggered after JIT changes. Here is how it works:
  1. It will perform windowx-x64 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_win_arm64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm64_x64.dll
  2. It will perform windowx-x86 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x86_x86.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm_x86.dll
  3. It will spawn 6 machines corresponding to the 6 configurations about to run superpmi replay for below environment variables:

    • "JitStressRegs=0" (default - no flags)
    • "JitStressRegs=1"
    • "JitStressRegs=2"
    • "JitStressRegs=3"
    • "JitStressRegs=4"
    • "JitStressRegs=8"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x10"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x80"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x1000"
  4. In each of the 6 runs, it will download all the collections corresponding to the OS/architecture and do replay for each of the flags and upload a consolidated superpmi__arch.log as an artifact. Currently the pipeline fails because of a bug in helix tracked by https://github.com/dotnet/core-eng/issues/13983.
Changes:
  • Add superpmi-replay public pipeline
  • Added option for --no_progress in "superpmi download" so we do not see the progress logs during mch downloading.
  • Added a template of download-specific-artifacts.yml.
Since I have introduced superpmi-replay** files, I will submit a follow-up PR to rename existing superpmi* files that does the collection to superpmi-collect**.
Also, as a follow-up work, we would trigger this pipeline after superpmi-collect pipeline completes so the collection are fresh and we don't get "missing key errors".
Fixes: #52392
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-CodeGen-coreclr
CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
label
Aug 4, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
changed the title
Spmi replaySpmi replay pipelineAug 5, 2021
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 5, 2021 16:27
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 5, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@dotnet/jit-contrib
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Can someone review this? Want to make sure that this goes in before we freeze the main.
echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

@echesakovechesakovAug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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


Suggested change

 - ${{ if eq(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts, false) }}:
 - ${{ if not(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts) }}:
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-replay-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

@ghost
ghost
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Hello @kunalspathak!
Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.
p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.
briansull
briansull
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
@briansullbriansull
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks Good to Me
@ghost

ghost

merged commit 0812322
into
dotnet:mainAug 11, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Aug 13, 2021
 Merged

@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@kunalspathak Love this work!
Are you planning to move the pipeline from internal to public, so it can be auto-triggered or manually triggered on JIT PR's? Or is there some reason why it must remain on "internal" and run post-merge?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
We could definitely make it public but there is one scenario in which it doesn't work - If the PR changes the JITEE guid, then we don't get new collection for new guid because we haven't collected it. What should ideally happen in such cases is that collection pipeline should trigger the replay pipeline. But other than that, this can be moved to public (let me know if you plan on doing it).
@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  1. The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
  2. Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
  • The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
Currently, the partitions are hardcoded in superpmi-replay.proj. Further splitting based on collection would definitely reduce the run time, but the list in below file will grow (no. of collection X 6 entries), but is definitely do-able.
runtime/src/coreclr/scripts/superpmi-replay.proj

Lines 45 to 55
in
7994e59
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x64'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x64"Platform="windows"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-arm64"Platform="windows"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-x64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x86'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x86"Platform="windows"Architecture="x86" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
  • Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
I didn't see any assert yet. The pipeline failed once and reported when we didn't had .mch files to run on.

This was referenced Sep 22, 2021

Closed


Closed


Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 25, 2021

This pull request was closed.

Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers


2 more reviewers

@echesakovechesakovechesakov left review comments
@briansullbriansullbriansull approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclrCLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create SuperPMI replay job


4 participants

@kunalspathak@BruceForstall@echesakov@briansull

, '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
Spmi replay pipeline - #56871
Merged
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Aug 11, 2021
Merged
Spmi replay pipeline#56871
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Aug 4, 2021•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Introduce superpmi-replay public pipeline that will be triggered after JIT changes. Here is how it works:
  1. It will perform windowx-x64 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_win_arm64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm64_x64.dll
  2. It will perform windowx-x86 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x86_x86.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm_x86.dll
  3. It will spawn 6 machines corresponding to the 6 configurations about to run superpmi replay for below environment variables:

    • "JitStressRegs=0" (default - no flags)
    • "JitStressRegs=1"
    • "JitStressRegs=2"
    • "JitStressRegs=3"
    • "JitStressRegs=4"
    • "JitStressRegs=8"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x10"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x80"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x1000"
  4. In each of the 6 runs, it will download all the collections corresponding to the OS/architecture and do replay for each of the flags and upload a consolidated superpmi__arch.log as an artifact. Currently the pipeline fails because of a bug in helix tracked by https://github.com/dotnet/core-eng/issues/13983.
Changes:
  • Add superpmi-replay public pipeline
  • Added option for --no_progress in "superpmi download" so we do not see the progress logs during mch downloading.
  • Added a template of download-specific-artifacts.yml.
Since I have introduced superpmi-replay** files, I will submit a follow-up PR to rename existing superpmi* files that does the collection to superpmi-collect**.
Also, as a follow-up work, we would trigger this pipeline after superpmi-collect pipeline completes so the collection are fresh and we don't get "missing key errors".
Fixes: #52392
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-CodeGen-coreclr
CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
label
Aug 4, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
changed the title
Spmi replaySpmi replay pipelineAug 5, 2021
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 5, 2021 16:27
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 5, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@dotnet/jit-contrib
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Can someone review this? Want to make sure that this goes in before we freeze the main.
echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

@echesakovechesakovAug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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


Suggested change

 - ${{ if eq(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts, false) }}:
 - ${{ if not(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts) }}:
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-replay-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

@ghost
ghost
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Hello @kunalspathak!
Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.
p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.
briansull
briansull
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
@briansullbriansull
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks Good to Me
@ghost

ghost

merged commit 0812322
into
dotnet:mainAug 11, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Aug 13, 2021
 Merged

@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@kunalspathak Love this work!
Are you planning to move the pipeline from internal to public, so it can be auto-triggered or manually triggered on JIT PR's? Or is there some reason why it must remain on "internal" and run post-merge?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
We could definitely make it public but there is one scenario in which it doesn't work - If the PR changes the JITEE guid, then we don't get new collection for new guid because we haven't collected it. What should ideally happen in such cases is that collection pipeline should trigger the replay pipeline. But other than that, this can be moved to public (let me know if you plan on doing it).
@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  1. The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
  2. Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
  • The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
Currently, the partitions are hardcoded in superpmi-replay.proj. Further splitting based on collection would definitely reduce the run time, but the list in below file will grow (no. of collection X 6 entries), but is definitely do-able.
runtime/src/coreclr/scripts/superpmi-replay.proj

Lines 45 to 55
in
7994e59
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x64'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x64"Platform="windows"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-arm64"Platform="windows"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-x64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x86'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x86"Platform="windows"Architecture="x86" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
  • Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
I didn't see any assert yet. The pipeline failed once and reported when we didn't had .mch files to run on.

This was referenced Sep 22, 2021

Closed


Closed


Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 25, 2021

This pull request was closed.

Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers


2 more reviewers

@echesakovechesakovechesakov left review comments
@briansullbriansullbriansull approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclrCLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create SuperPMI replay job


4 participants

@kunalspathak@BruceForstall@echesakov@briansull

, '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
Spmi replay pipeline - #56871
Merged
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Aug 11, 2021
Merged
Spmi replay pipeline#56871
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Aug 4, 2021•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Introduce superpmi-replay public pipeline that will be triggered after JIT changes. Here is how it works:
  1. It will perform windowx-x64 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_win_arm64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm64_x64.dll
  2. It will perform windowx-x86 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x86_x86.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm_x86.dll
  3. It will spawn 6 machines corresponding to the 6 configurations about to run superpmi replay for below environment variables:

    • "JitStressRegs=0" (default - no flags)
    • "JitStressRegs=1"
    • "JitStressRegs=2"
    • "JitStressRegs=3"
    • "JitStressRegs=4"
    • "JitStressRegs=8"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x10"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x80"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x1000"
  4. In each of the 6 runs, it will download all the collections corresponding to the OS/architecture and do replay for each of the flags and upload a consolidated superpmi__arch.log as an artifact. Currently the pipeline fails because of a bug in helix tracked by https://github.com/dotnet/core-eng/issues/13983.
Changes:
  • Add superpmi-replay public pipeline
  • Added option for --no_progress in "superpmi download" so we do not see the progress logs during mch downloading.
  • Added a template of download-specific-artifacts.yml.
Since I have introduced superpmi-replay** files, I will submit a follow-up PR to rename existing superpmi* files that does the collection to superpmi-collect**.
Also, as a follow-up work, we would trigger this pipeline after superpmi-collect pipeline completes so the collection are fresh and we don't get "missing key errors".
Fixes: #52392
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-CodeGen-coreclr
CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
label
Aug 4, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
changed the title
Spmi replaySpmi replay pipelineAug 5, 2021
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 5, 2021 16:27
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 5, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@dotnet/jit-contrib
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Can someone review this? Want to make sure that this goes in before we freeze the main.
echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

@echesakovechesakovAug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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


Suggested change

 - ${{ if eq(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts, false) }}:
 - ${{ if not(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts) }}:
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-replay-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

@ghost
ghost
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Hello @kunalspathak!
Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.
p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.
briansull
briansull
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
@briansullbriansull
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks Good to Me
@ghost

ghost

merged commit 0812322
into
dotnet:mainAug 11, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Aug 13, 2021
 Merged

@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@kunalspathak Love this work!
Are you planning to move the pipeline from internal to public, so it can be auto-triggered or manually triggered on JIT PR's? Or is there some reason why it must remain on "internal" and run post-merge?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
We could definitely make it public but there is one scenario in which it doesn't work - If the PR changes the JITEE guid, then we don't get new collection for new guid because we haven't collected it. What should ideally happen in such cases is that collection pipeline should trigger the replay pipeline. But other than that, this can be moved to public (let me know if you plan on doing it).
@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  1. The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
  2. Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
  • The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
Currently, the partitions are hardcoded in superpmi-replay.proj. Further splitting based on collection would definitely reduce the run time, but the list in below file will grow (no. of collection X 6 entries), but is definitely do-able.
runtime/src/coreclr/scripts/superpmi-replay.proj

Lines 45 to 55
in
7994e59
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x64'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x64"Platform="windows"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-arm64"Platform="windows"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-x64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x86'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x86"Platform="windows"Architecture="x86" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
  • Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
I didn't see any assert yet. The pipeline failed once and reported when we didn't had .mch files to run on.

This was referenced Sep 22, 2021

Closed


Closed


Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 25, 2021

This pull request was closed.

Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers


2 more reviewers

@echesakovechesakovechesakov left review comments
@briansullbriansullbriansull approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclrCLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create SuperPMI replay job


4 participants

@kunalspathak@BruceForstall@echesakov@briansull

, '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
Spmi replay pipeline - #56871
Merged
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Aug 11, 2021
Merged
Spmi replay pipeline#56871
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Aug 4, 2021•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Introduce superpmi-replay public pipeline that will be triggered after JIT changes. Here is how it works:
  1. It will perform windowx-x64 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_win_arm64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm64_x64.dll
  2. It will perform windowx-x86 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x86_x86.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm_x86.dll
  3. It will spawn 6 machines corresponding to the 6 configurations about to run superpmi replay for below environment variables:

    • "JitStressRegs=0" (default - no flags)
    • "JitStressRegs=1"
    • "JitStressRegs=2"
    • "JitStressRegs=3"
    • "JitStressRegs=4"
    • "JitStressRegs=8"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x10"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x80"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x1000"
  4. In each of the 6 runs, it will download all the collections corresponding to the OS/architecture and do replay for each of the flags and upload a consolidated superpmi__arch.log as an artifact. Currently the pipeline fails because of a bug in helix tracked by https://github.com/dotnet/core-eng/issues/13983.
Changes:
  • Add superpmi-replay public pipeline
  • Added option for --no_progress in "superpmi download" so we do not see the progress logs during mch downloading.
  • Added a template of download-specific-artifacts.yml.
Since I have introduced superpmi-replay** files, I will submit a follow-up PR to rename existing superpmi* files that does the collection to superpmi-collect**.
Also, as a follow-up work, we would trigger this pipeline after superpmi-collect pipeline completes so the collection are fresh and we don't get "missing key errors".
Fixes: #52392
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-CodeGen-coreclr
CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
label
Aug 4, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
changed the title
Spmi replaySpmi replay pipelineAug 5, 2021
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 5, 2021 16:27
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 5, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@dotnet/jit-contrib
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Can someone review this? Want to make sure that this goes in before we freeze the main.
echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

@echesakovechesakovAug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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


Suggested change

 - ${{ if eq(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts, false) }}:
 - ${{ if not(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts) }}:
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-replay-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

@ghost
ghost
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Hello @kunalspathak!
Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.
p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.
briansull
briansull
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
@briansullbriansull
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks Good to Me
@ghost

ghost

merged commit 0812322
into
dotnet:mainAug 11, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Aug 13, 2021
 Merged

@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@kunalspathak Love this work!
Are you planning to move the pipeline from internal to public, so it can be auto-triggered or manually triggered on JIT PR's? Or is there some reason why it must remain on "internal" and run post-merge?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
We could definitely make it public but there is one scenario in which it doesn't work - If the PR changes the JITEE guid, then we don't get new collection for new guid because we haven't collected it. What should ideally happen in such cases is that collection pipeline should trigger the replay pipeline. But other than that, this can be moved to public (let me know if you plan on doing it).
@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  1. The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
  2. Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
  • The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
Currently, the partitions are hardcoded in superpmi-replay.proj. Further splitting based on collection would definitely reduce the run time, but the list in below file will grow (no. of collection X 6 entries), but is definitely do-able.
runtime/src/coreclr/scripts/superpmi-replay.proj

Lines 45 to 55
in
7994e59
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x64'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x64"Platform="windows"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-arm64"Platform="windows"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-x64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x86'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x86"Platform="windows"Architecture="x86" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
  • Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
I didn't see any assert yet. The pipeline failed once and reported when we didn't had .mch files to run on.

This was referenced Sep 22, 2021

Closed


Closed


Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 25, 2021

This pull request was closed.

Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers


2 more reviewers

@echesakovechesakovechesakov left review comments
@briansullbriansullbriansull approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclrCLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create SuperPMI replay job


4 participants

@kunalspathak@BruceForstall@echesakov@briansull

, '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
Spmi replay pipeline - #56871
Merged
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Aug 11, 2021
Merged
Spmi replay pipeline#56871
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Aug 4, 2021•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Introduce superpmi-replay public pipeline that will be triggered after JIT changes. Here is how it works:
  1. It will perform windowx-x64 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_win_arm64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm64_x64.dll
  2. It will perform windowx-x86 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x86_x86.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm_x86.dll
  3. It will spawn 6 machines corresponding to the 6 configurations about to run superpmi replay for below environment variables:

    • "JitStressRegs=0" (default - no flags)
    • "JitStressRegs=1"
    • "JitStressRegs=2"
    • "JitStressRegs=3"
    • "JitStressRegs=4"
    • "JitStressRegs=8"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x10"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x80"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x1000"
  4. In each of the 6 runs, it will download all the collections corresponding to the OS/architecture and do replay for each of the flags and upload a consolidated superpmi__arch.log as an artifact. Currently the pipeline fails because of a bug in helix tracked by https://github.com/dotnet/core-eng/issues/13983.
Changes:
  • Add superpmi-replay public pipeline
  • Added option for --no_progress in "superpmi download" so we do not see the progress logs during mch downloading.
  • Added a template of download-specific-artifacts.yml.
Since I have introduced superpmi-replay** files, I will submit a follow-up PR to rename existing superpmi* files that does the collection to superpmi-collect**.
Also, as a follow-up work, we would trigger this pipeline after superpmi-collect pipeline completes so the collection are fresh and we don't get "missing key errors".
Fixes: #52392
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-CodeGen-coreclr
CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
label
Aug 4, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
changed the title
Spmi replaySpmi replay pipelineAug 5, 2021
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 5, 2021 16:27
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 5, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@dotnet/jit-contrib
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Can someone review this? Want to make sure that this goes in before we freeze the main.
echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

@echesakovechesakovAug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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


Suggested change

 - ${{ if eq(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts, false) }}:
 - ${{ if not(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts) }}:
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-replay-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

@ghost
ghost
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Hello @kunalspathak!
Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.
p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.
briansull
briansull
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
@briansullbriansull
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks Good to Me
@ghost

ghost

merged commit 0812322
into
dotnet:mainAug 11, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Aug 13, 2021
 Merged

@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@kunalspathak Love this work!
Are you planning to move the pipeline from internal to public, so it can be auto-triggered or manually triggered on JIT PR's? Or is there some reason why it must remain on "internal" and run post-merge?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
We could definitely make it public but there is one scenario in which it doesn't work - If the PR changes the JITEE guid, then we don't get new collection for new guid because we haven't collected it. What should ideally happen in such cases is that collection pipeline should trigger the replay pipeline. But other than that, this can be moved to public (let me know if you plan on doing it).
@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  1. The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
  2. Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
  • The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
Currently, the partitions are hardcoded in superpmi-replay.proj. Further splitting based on collection would definitely reduce the run time, but the list in below file will grow (no. of collection X 6 entries), but is definitely do-able.
runtime/src/coreclr/scripts/superpmi-replay.proj

Lines 45 to 55
in
7994e59
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x64'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x64"Platform="windows"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-arm64"Platform="windows"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-x64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x86'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x86"Platform="windows"Architecture="x86" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
  • Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
I didn't see any assert yet. The pipeline failed once and reported when we didn't had .mch files to run on.

This was referenced Sep 22, 2021

Closed


Closed


Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 25, 2021

This pull request was closed.

Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers


2 more reviewers

@echesakovechesakovechesakov left review comments
@briansullbriansullbriansull approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclrCLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create SuperPMI replay job


4 participants

@kunalspathak@BruceForstall@echesakov@briansull

, '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
Spmi replay pipeline - #56871
Merged
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Aug 11, 2021
Merged
Spmi replay pipeline#56871
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Aug 4, 2021•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Introduce superpmi-replay public pipeline that will be triggered after JIT changes. Here is how it works:
  1. It will perform windowx-x64 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_win_arm64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm64_x64.dll
  2. It will perform windowx-x86 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x86_x86.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm_x86.dll
  3. It will spawn 6 machines corresponding to the 6 configurations about to run superpmi replay for below environment variables:

    • "JitStressRegs=0" (default - no flags)
    • "JitStressRegs=1"
    • "JitStressRegs=2"
    • "JitStressRegs=3"
    • "JitStressRegs=4"
    • "JitStressRegs=8"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x10"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x80"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x1000"
  4. In each of the 6 runs, it will download all the collections corresponding to the OS/architecture and do replay for each of the flags and upload a consolidated superpmi__arch.log as an artifact. Currently the pipeline fails because of a bug in helix tracked by https://github.com/dotnet/core-eng/issues/13983.
Changes:
  • Add superpmi-replay public pipeline
  • Added option for --no_progress in "superpmi download" so we do not see the progress logs during mch downloading.
  • Added a template of download-specific-artifacts.yml.
Since I have introduced superpmi-replay** files, I will submit a follow-up PR to rename existing superpmi* files that does the collection to superpmi-collect**.
Also, as a follow-up work, we would trigger this pipeline after superpmi-collect pipeline completes so the collection are fresh and we don't get "missing key errors".
Fixes: #52392
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-CodeGen-coreclr
CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
label
Aug 4, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
changed the title
Spmi replaySpmi replay pipelineAug 5, 2021
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 5, 2021 16:27
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 5, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@dotnet/jit-contrib
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Can someone review this? Want to make sure that this goes in before we freeze the main.
echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

@echesakovechesakovAug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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


Suggested change

 - ${{ if eq(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts, false) }}:
 - ${{ if not(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts) }}:
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-replay-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

@ghost
ghost
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Hello @kunalspathak!
Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.
p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.
briansull
briansull
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
@briansullbriansull
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks Good to Me
@ghost

ghost

merged commit 0812322
into
dotnet:mainAug 11, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Aug 13, 2021
 Merged

@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@kunalspathak Love this work!
Are you planning to move the pipeline from internal to public, so it can be auto-triggered or manually triggered on JIT PR's? Or is there some reason why it must remain on "internal" and run post-merge?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
We could definitely make it public but there is one scenario in which it doesn't work - If the PR changes the JITEE guid, then we don't get new collection for new guid because we haven't collected it. What should ideally happen in such cases is that collection pipeline should trigger the replay pipeline. But other than that, this can be moved to public (let me know if you plan on doing it).
@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  1. The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
  2. Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
  • The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
Currently, the partitions are hardcoded in superpmi-replay.proj. Further splitting based on collection would definitely reduce the run time, but the list in below file will grow (no. of collection X 6 entries), but is definitely do-able.
runtime/src/coreclr/scripts/superpmi-replay.proj

Lines 45 to 55
in
7994e59
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x64'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x64"Platform="windows"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-arm64"Platform="windows"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-x64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x86'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x86"Platform="windows"Architecture="x86" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
  • Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
I didn't see any assert yet. The pipeline failed once and reported when we didn't had .mch files to run on.

This was referenced Sep 22, 2021

Closed


Closed


Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 25, 2021

This pull request was closed.

Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers


2 more reviewers

@echesakovechesakovechesakov left review comments
@briansullbriansullbriansull approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclrCLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create SuperPMI replay job


4 participants

@kunalspathak@BruceForstall@echesakov@briansull

, '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
Spmi replay pipeline - #56871
Merged
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Aug 11, 2021
Merged
Spmi replay pipeline#56871
66 commits merged into
dotnet:mainfrom 
kunalspathak:spmi-replay
Conversation
@kunalspathak
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
commented
Aug 4, 2021•

edited

Loading

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Introduce superpmi-replay public pipeline that will be triggered after JIT changes. Here is how it works:
  1. It will perform windowx-x64 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_win_arm64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_x64_x64.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm64_x64.dll
  2. It will perform windowx-x86 build to cross-compile following jit binaries:

    • clrjit_win_x86_x86.dll
    • clrjit_unix_arm_x86.dll
  3. It will spawn 6 machines corresponding to the 6 configurations about to run superpmi replay for below environment variables:

    • "JitStressRegs=0" (default - no flags)
    • "JitStressRegs=1"
    • "JitStressRegs=2"
    • "JitStressRegs=3"
    • "JitStressRegs=4"
    • "JitStressRegs=8"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x10"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x80"
    • "JitStressRegs=0x1000"
  4. In each of the 6 runs, it will download all the collections corresponding to the OS/architecture and do replay for each of the flags and upload a consolidated superpmi__arch.log as an artifact. Currently the pipeline fails because of a bug in helix tracked by https://github.com/dotnet/core-eng/issues/13983.
Changes:
  • Add superpmi-replay public pipeline
  • Added option for --no_progress in "superpmi download" so we do not see the progress logs during mch downloading.
  • Added a template of download-specific-artifacts.yml.
Since I have introduced superpmi-replay** files, I will submit a follow-up PR to rename existing superpmi* files that does the collection to superpmi-collect**.
Also, as a follow-up work, we would trigger this pipeline after superpmi-collect pipeline completes so the collection are fresh and we don't get "missing key errors".
Fixes: #52392
@ghostghost
added
the 
area-CodeGen-coreclr
CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
label
Aug 4, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
changed the title
Spmi replaySpmi replay pipelineAug 5, 2021
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
marked this pull request as ready for review
August 5, 2021 16:27
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 5, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
@dotnet/jit-contrib
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
Can someone review this? Want to make sure that this goes in before we freeze the main.
echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

echesakov
echesakov
reviewed
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

@echesakovechesakovAug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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


Suggested change

 - ${{ if eq(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts, false) }}:
 - ${{ if not(parameters.uploadAsArtifacts) }}:
Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/build-jit-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/coreclr/templates/run-superpmi-replay-job.yml
Outdated

Comment threadeng/pipelines/common/download-specific-artifact-step.yml
Outdated

@ghost
ghost
commented
Aug 11, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Hello @kunalspathak!
Because this pull request has the auto-merge label, I will be glad to assist with helping to merge this pull request once all check-in policies pass.
p.s. you can customize the way I help with merging this pull request, such as holding this pull request until a specific person approves. Simply @mention me (@msftbot) and give me an instruction to get started! Learn more here.
briansull
briansull
approved these changes
Aug 11, 2021
View reviewed changes
@briansullbriansull
left a comment


Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks Good to Me
@ghost

ghost

merged commit 0812322
into
dotnet:mainAug 11, 2021
@kunalspathakkunalspathak
mentioned this pull request
Aug 13, 2021
 Merged

@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
@kunalspathak Love this work!
Are you planning to move the pipeline from internal to public, so it can be auto-triggered or manually triggered on JIT PR's? Or is there some reason why it must remain on "internal" and run post-merge?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 25, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
We could definitely make it public but there is one scenario in which it doesn't work - If the PR changes the JITEE guid, then we don't get new collection for new guid because we haven't collected it. What should ideally happen in such cases is that collection pipeline should trigger the replay pipeline. But other than that, this can be moved to public (let me know if you plan on doing it).
@BruceForstall
BruceForstall
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

Contributor
  1. The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
  2. Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
@kunalspathak
kunalspathak
commented
Aug 26, 2021

Copy link


Copy Markdown

ContributorAuthor
  • The "run" legs of the pipeline take 1.5 or 2 hours. Is that because they do all the work on one Helix machine each? Would it be hard to split the work up to run more in parallel? We'd need to do this if we want to run in a PR.
Currently, the partitions are hardcoded in superpmi-replay.proj. Further splitting based on collection would definitely reduce the run time, but the list in below file will grow (no. of collection X 6 entries), but is definitely do-able.
runtime/src/coreclr/scripts/superpmi-replay.proj

Lines 45 to 55
in
7994e59
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x64'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x64"Platform="windows"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-arm64"Platform="windows"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-x64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="x64" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm64"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm64" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
 <ItemGroupCondition="'$(Architecture)' == 'x86'"> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="win-x86"Platform="windows"Architecture="x86" /> 
 <SPMI_PartitionInclude="unix-arm"Platform="Linux"Architecture="arm" /> 
 </ItemGroup> 
  • Did implementing this find any asserts in the JIT? Did you test that if an assert is found, the job is marked as failing?
I didn't see any assert yet. The pipeline failed once and reported when we didn't had .mch files to run on.

This was referenced Sep 22, 2021

Closed


Closed


Closed

@ghostghost
locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators
Sep 25, 2021

This pull request was closed.

Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.


Reviewers


2 more reviewers

@echesakovechesakovechesakov left review comments
@briansullbriansullbriansull approved these changes
Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees


No one assigned


Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclrCLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects


None yet


Milestone


No milestone


Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Create SuperPMI replay job


4 participants

@kunalspathak@BruceForstall@echesakov@briansull