Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation - #87115

Merged
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation#87115
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report

Conversation

@EgorBo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 4, 2023
@ghostghost assigned EgorBoJun 4, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Jun 4, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Issue Details

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

Author:EgorBo
Assignees:EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone:-

@EgorBo
EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review June 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo
EgorBo requested a review from AndyAyersMSJune 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo

EgorBo commented Jun 5, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AndyAyersMS PTAL, we talked about this last week
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

{
if (!opts.OptEnabled(CLFLG_INLINING))
{
/* XXX Mon 8/18/2008

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.

Seems like the comment doesn't add a lot of value

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 5, 2023

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.

Calls Report explicitly instead of relying on destructor

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

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.

Reverted to destructor since it raised a question - I don't have a strong opinion about it

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated

// These also depend on call-sites
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_OVER_BUDGET:
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_TOO_MANY_LOCALS:

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.

CALLSITE observations shouldn't lead to "never" reports back to the VM.

Only CALLEE observations should have this effect.

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.

Thanks, removed

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
InlineResult inlineResult(this, call, nullptr, "impMarkInlineCandidate");
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, 0, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo, ilOffset,
&inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

Ditto here -- does the destructor not work for some reason?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated
// These thresholds may depend on PGO data (we allow more blocks/bigger IL size
// for hot methods so we want to make sure we won't bake 'noinline' just because
// some semi-hot callsite didn't expand these thresholds).
case InlineObservation::CALLEE_TOO_MANY_BASIC_BLOCKS:

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 think this will have a detrimental effect on TP as we now will repeatedly analyze even very large methods to see if they are good inline candidates. Surely there must be some size/complexity value that will disqualify a method from ever being inlined.

As an alternative, consider making the call to SetNever conditional on some higher threshold, for policies that handle these observations, eg see ProfilePolicy::NoteInt.

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 7, 2023

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 decided to revert these changes so I can study the TP impact separately

@EgorBo
EgorBo merged commit d3ea4a9 into dotnet:mainJun 8, 2023
@EgorBo
EgorBo deleted the fix-inline-report branch June 8, 2023 09:28
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@EgorBo@AndyAyersMS
, '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

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation - #87115

Merged
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation#87115
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report

Conversation

@EgorBo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 4, 2023
@ghostghost assigned EgorBoJun 4, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Jun 4, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Issue Details

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

Author:EgorBo
Assignees:EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone:-

@EgorBo
EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review June 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo
EgorBo requested a review from AndyAyersMSJune 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo

EgorBo commented Jun 5, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AndyAyersMS PTAL, we talked about this last week
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

{
if (!opts.OptEnabled(CLFLG_INLINING))
{
/* XXX Mon 8/18/2008

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.

Seems like the comment doesn't add a lot of value

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 5, 2023

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.

Calls Report explicitly instead of relying on destructor

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

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.

Reverted to destructor since it raised a question - I don't have a strong opinion about it

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated

// These also depend on call-sites
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_OVER_BUDGET:
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_TOO_MANY_LOCALS:

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.

CALLSITE observations shouldn't lead to "never" reports back to the VM.

Only CALLEE observations should have this effect.

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.

Thanks, removed

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
InlineResult inlineResult(this, call, nullptr, "impMarkInlineCandidate");
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, 0, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo, ilOffset,
&inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

Ditto here -- does the destructor not work for some reason?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated
// These thresholds may depend on PGO data (we allow more blocks/bigger IL size
// for hot methods so we want to make sure we won't bake 'noinline' just because
// some semi-hot callsite didn't expand these thresholds).
case InlineObservation::CALLEE_TOO_MANY_BASIC_BLOCKS:

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 think this will have a detrimental effect on TP as we now will repeatedly analyze even very large methods to see if they are good inline candidates. Surely there must be some size/complexity value that will disqualify a method from ever being inlined.

As an alternative, consider making the call to SetNever conditional on some higher threshold, for policies that handle these observations, eg see ProfilePolicy::NoteInt.

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 7, 2023

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 decided to revert these changes so I can study the TP impact separately

@EgorBo
EgorBo merged commit d3ea4a9 into dotnet:mainJun 8, 2023
@EgorBo
EgorBo deleted the fix-inline-report branch June 8, 2023 09:28
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@EgorBo@AndyAyersMS
, '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

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation - #87115

Merged
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation#87115
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report

Conversation

@EgorBo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 4, 2023
@ghostghost assigned EgorBoJun 4, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Jun 4, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Issue Details

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

Author:EgorBo
Assignees:EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone:-

@EgorBo
EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review June 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo
EgorBo requested a review from AndyAyersMSJune 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo

EgorBo commented Jun 5, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AndyAyersMS PTAL, we talked about this last week
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

{
if (!opts.OptEnabled(CLFLG_INLINING))
{
/* XXX Mon 8/18/2008

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.

Seems like the comment doesn't add a lot of value

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 5, 2023

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.

Calls Report explicitly instead of relying on destructor

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

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.

Reverted to destructor since it raised a question - I don't have a strong opinion about it

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated

// These also depend on call-sites
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_OVER_BUDGET:
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_TOO_MANY_LOCALS:

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.

CALLSITE observations shouldn't lead to "never" reports back to the VM.

Only CALLEE observations should have this effect.

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.

Thanks, removed

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
InlineResult inlineResult(this, call, nullptr, "impMarkInlineCandidate");
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, 0, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo, ilOffset,
&inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

Ditto here -- does the destructor not work for some reason?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated
// These thresholds may depend on PGO data (we allow more blocks/bigger IL size
// for hot methods so we want to make sure we won't bake 'noinline' just because
// some semi-hot callsite didn't expand these thresholds).
case InlineObservation::CALLEE_TOO_MANY_BASIC_BLOCKS:

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 think this will have a detrimental effect on TP as we now will repeatedly analyze even very large methods to see if they are good inline candidates. Surely there must be some size/complexity value that will disqualify a method from ever being inlined.

As an alternative, consider making the call to SetNever conditional on some higher threshold, for policies that handle these observations, eg see ProfilePolicy::NoteInt.

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 7, 2023

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 decided to revert these changes so I can study the TP impact separately

@EgorBo
EgorBo merged commit d3ea4a9 into dotnet:mainJun 8, 2023
@EgorBo
EgorBo deleted the fix-inline-report branch June 8, 2023 09:28
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@EgorBo@AndyAyersMS
, '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

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation - #87115

Merged
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation#87115
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report

Conversation

@EgorBo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 4, 2023
@ghostghost assigned EgorBoJun 4, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Jun 4, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Issue Details

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

Author:EgorBo
Assignees:EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone:-

@EgorBo
EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review June 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo
EgorBo requested a review from AndyAyersMSJune 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo

EgorBo commented Jun 5, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AndyAyersMS PTAL, we talked about this last week
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

{
if (!opts.OptEnabled(CLFLG_INLINING))
{
/* XXX Mon 8/18/2008

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.

Seems like the comment doesn't add a lot of value

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 5, 2023

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.

Calls Report explicitly instead of relying on destructor

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

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.

Reverted to destructor since it raised a question - I don't have a strong opinion about it

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated

// These also depend on call-sites
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_OVER_BUDGET:
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_TOO_MANY_LOCALS:

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.

CALLSITE observations shouldn't lead to "never" reports back to the VM.

Only CALLEE observations should have this effect.

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.

Thanks, removed

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
InlineResult inlineResult(this, call, nullptr, "impMarkInlineCandidate");
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, 0, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo, ilOffset,
&inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

Ditto here -- does the destructor not work for some reason?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated
// These thresholds may depend on PGO data (we allow more blocks/bigger IL size
// for hot methods so we want to make sure we won't bake 'noinline' just because
// some semi-hot callsite didn't expand these thresholds).
case InlineObservation::CALLEE_TOO_MANY_BASIC_BLOCKS:

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 think this will have a detrimental effect on TP as we now will repeatedly analyze even very large methods to see if they are good inline candidates. Surely there must be some size/complexity value that will disqualify a method from ever being inlined.

As an alternative, consider making the call to SetNever conditional on some higher threshold, for policies that handle these observations, eg see ProfilePolicy::NoteInt.

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 7, 2023

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 decided to revert these changes so I can study the TP impact separately

@EgorBo
EgorBo merged commit d3ea4a9 into dotnet:mainJun 8, 2023
@EgorBo
EgorBo deleted the fix-inline-report branch June 8, 2023 09:28
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@EgorBo@AndyAyersMS
, '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

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation - #87115

Merged
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation#87115
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report

Conversation

@EgorBo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 4, 2023
@ghostghost assigned EgorBoJun 4, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Jun 4, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Issue Details

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

Author:EgorBo
Assignees:EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone:-

@EgorBo
EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review June 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo
EgorBo requested a review from AndyAyersMSJune 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo

EgorBo commented Jun 5, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AndyAyersMS PTAL, we talked about this last week
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

{
if (!opts.OptEnabled(CLFLG_INLINING))
{
/* XXX Mon 8/18/2008

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.

Seems like the comment doesn't add a lot of value

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 5, 2023

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.

Calls Report explicitly instead of relying on destructor

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

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.

Reverted to destructor since it raised a question - I don't have a strong opinion about it

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated

// These also depend on call-sites
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_OVER_BUDGET:
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_TOO_MANY_LOCALS:

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.

CALLSITE observations shouldn't lead to "never" reports back to the VM.

Only CALLEE observations should have this effect.

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.

Thanks, removed

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
InlineResult inlineResult(this, call, nullptr, "impMarkInlineCandidate");
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, 0, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo, ilOffset,
&inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

Ditto here -- does the destructor not work for some reason?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated
// These thresholds may depend on PGO data (we allow more blocks/bigger IL size
// for hot methods so we want to make sure we won't bake 'noinline' just because
// some semi-hot callsite didn't expand these thresholds).
case InlineObservation::CALLEE_TOO_MANY_BASIC_BLOCKS:

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 think this will have a detrimental effect on TP as we now will repeatedly analyze even very large methods to see if they are good inline candidates. Surely there must be some size/complexity value that will disqualify a method from ever being inlined.

As an alternative, consider making the call to SetNever conditional on some higher threshold, for policies that handle these observations, eg see ProfilePolicy::NoteInt.

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 7, 2023

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 decided to revert these changes so I can study the TP impact separately

@EgorBo
EgorBo merged commit d3ea4a9 into dotnet:mainJun 8, 2023
@EgorBo
EgorBo deleted the fix-inline-report branch June 8, 2023 09:28
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@EgorBo@AndyAyersMS
, '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

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation - #87115

Merged
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation#87115
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report

Conversation

@EgorBo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 4, 2023
@ghostghost assigned EgorBoJun 4, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Jun 4, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Issue Details

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

Author:EgorBo
Assignees:EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone:-

@EgorBo
EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review June 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo
EgorBo requested a review from AndyAyersMSJune 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo

EgorBo commented Jun 5, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AndyAyersMS PTAL, we talked about this last week
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

{
if (!opts.OptEnabled(CLFLG_INLINING))
{
/* XXX Mon 8/18/2008

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.

Seems like the comment doesn't add a lot of value

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 5, 2023

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.

Calls Report explicitly instead of relying on destructor

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

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.

Reverted to destructor since it raised a question - I don't have a strong opinion about it

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated

// These also depend on call-sites
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_OVER_BUDGET:
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_TOO_MANY_LOCALS:

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.

CALLSITE observations shouldn't lead to "never" reports back to the VM.

Only CALLEE observations should have this effect.

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.

Thanks, removed

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
InlineResult inlineResult(this, call, nullptr, "impMarkInlineCandidate");
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, 0, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo, ilOffset,
&inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

Ditto here -- does the destructor not work for some reason?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated
// These thresholds may depend on PGO data (we allow more blocks/bigger IL size
// for hot methods so we want to make sure we won't bake 'noinline' just because
// some semi-hot callsite didn't expand these thresholds).
case InlineObservation::CALLEE_TOO_MANY_BASIC_BLOCKS:

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 think this will have a detrimental effect on TP as we now will repeatedly analyze even very large methods to see if they are good inline candidates. Surely there must be some size/complexity value that will disqualify a method from ever being inlined.

As an alternative, consider making the call to SetNever conditional on some higher threshold, for policies that handle these observations, eg see ProfilePolicy::NoteInt.

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 7, 2023

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 decided to revert these changes so I can study the TP impact separately

@EgorBo
EgorBo merged commit d3ea4a9 into dotnet:mainJun 8, 2023
@EgorBo
EgorBo deleted the fix-inline-report branch June 8, 2023 09:28
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@EgorBo@AndyAyersMS
, '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

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation - #87115

Merged
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation#87115
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report

Conversation

@EgorBo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 4, 2023
@ghostghost assigned EgorBoJun 4, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Jun 4, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Issue Details

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

Author:EgorBo
Assignees:EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone:-

@EgorBo
EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review June 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo
EgorBo requested a review from AndyAyersMSJune 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo

EgorBo commented Jun 5, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AndyAyersMS PTAL, we talked about this last week
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

{
if (!opts.OptEnabled(CLFLG_INLINING))
{
/* XXX Mon 8/18/2008

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.

Seems like the comment doesn't add a lot of value

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 5, 2023

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.

Calls Report explicitly instead of relying on destructor

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

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.

Reverted to destructor since it raised a question - I don't have a strong opinion about it

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated

// These also depend on call-sites
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_OVER_BUDGET:
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_TOO_MANY_LOCALS:

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.

CALLSITE observations shouldn't lead to "never" reports back to the VM.

Only CALLEE observations should have this effect.

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.

Thanks, removed

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
InlineResult inlineResult(this, call, nullptr, "impMarkInlineCandidate");
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, 0, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo, ilOffset,
&inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

Ditto here -- does the destructor not work for some reason?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated
// These thresholds may depend on PGO data (we allow more blocks/bigger IL size
// for hot methods so we want to make sure we won't bake 'noinline' just because
// some semi-hot callsite didn't expand these thresholds).
case InlineObservation::CALLEE_TOO_MANY_BASIC_BLOCKS:

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 think this will have a detrimental effect on TP as we now will repeatedly analyze even very large methods to see if they are good inline candidates. Surely there must be some size/complexity value that will disqualify a method from ever being inlined.

As an alternative, consider making the call to SetNever conditional on some higher threshold, for policies that handle these observations, eg see ProfilePolicy::NoteInt.

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 7, 2023

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 decided to revert these changes so I can study the TP impact separately

@EgorBo
EgorBo merged commit d3ea4a9 into dotnet:mainJun 8, 2023
@EgorBo
EgorBo deleted the fix-inline-report branch June 8, 2023 09:28
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@EgorBo@AndyAyersMS
, '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

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation - #87115

Merged
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report
Jun 8, 2023
Merged

Fix inline decision reporting + noinline propagation#87115
EgorBo merged 3 commits into
dotnet:mainfrom
EgorBo:fix-inline-report

Conversation

@EgorBo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

@ghostghost added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Jun 4, 2023
@ghostghost assigned EgorBoJun 4, 2023
@ghost

ghost commented Jun 4, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown

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

Issue Details

In #86551 I broke reporting of inline decisions, it led to two problems:

  1. Less informative JitDump for inline decisions
  2. We stopped marking methods with "noinline" attribute if we fail to inline them for various reasons.

The 2nd led to interesting effects - lots of benchmarks improved: #86902 (comment) (some regressed).

so I am fixing this back but also - extending the "allow list" in PropagateNeverToRuntime to not to propagate some specific inline decisions if they might depend on a call-site to avoid regressing other call-sites where context is different.

Author:EgorBo
Assignees:EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone:-

@EgorBo
EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review June 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo
EgorBo requested a review from AndyAyersMSJune 5, 2023 10:32
@EgorBo

EgorBo commented Jun 5, 2023

Copy link
Copy Markdown
MemberAuthor

@AndyAyersMS PTAL, we talked about this last week
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib

{
if (!opts.OptEnabled(CLFLG_INLINING))
{
/* XXX Mon 8/18/2008

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.

Seems like the comment doesn't add a lot of value

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 5, 2023

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.

Calls Report explicitly instead of relying on destructor

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

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.

Reverted to destructor since it raised a question - I don't have a strong opinion about it

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated

// These also depend on call-sites
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_OVER_BUDGET:
case InlineObservation::CALLSITE_TOO_MANY_LOCALS:

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.

CALLSITE observations shouldn't lead to "never" reports back to the VM.

Only CALLEE observations should have this effect.

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.

Thanks, removed

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
// Do the actual evaluation
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, candidateId, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo,
ilOffset, &inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

What went wrong with relying on the destructor?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/importercalls.cpp Outdated
InlineResult inlineResult(this, call, nullptr, "impMarkInlineCandidate");
impMarkInlineCandidateHelper(call, 0, exactContextHnd, exactContextNeedsRuntimeLookup, callInfo, ilOffset,
&inlineResult);
inlineResult.Report();

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.

Ditto here -- does the destructor not work for some reason?

Comment threadsrc/coreclr/jit/inlinepolicy.cpp Outdated
// These thresholds may depend on PGO data (we allow more blocks/bigger IL size
// for hot methods so we want to make sure we won't bake 'noinline' just because
// some semi-hot callsite didn't expand these thresholds).
case InlineObservation::CALLEE_TOO_MANY_BASIC_BLOCKS:

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 think this will have a detrimental effect on TP as we now will repeatedly analyze even very large methods to see if they are good inline candidates. Surely there must be some size/complexity value that will disqualify a method from ever being inlined.

As an alternative, consider making the call to SetNever conditional on some higher threshold, for policies that handle these observations, eg see ProfilePolicy::NoteInt.

@EgorBoEgorBoJun 7, 2023

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 decided to revert these changes so I can study the TP impact separately

@EgorBo
EgorBo merged commit d3ea4a9 into dotnet:mainJun 8, 2023
@EgorBo
EgorBo deleted the fix-inline-report branch June 8, 2023 09:28
@ghostghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 8, 2023
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

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

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@EgorBo@AndyAyersMS