Skip to content

[ProfileData] Sink the length checks #95559

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Conversation

kazutakahirata
Copy link
Contributor

The new API getValueArrayForSite returns ArrayRef,
packaging the array length and contents together.

This patch sinks the array length checks just before we check the
contents. This way, we check both the array length and contents
immediately after calling getValueArrayForSite.

The new API getValueArrayForSite returns ArrayRef<InstrProfValueData>,
packaging the array length and contents together.

This patch sinks the array length checks just before we check the
contents.  This way, we check both the array length and contents
immediately after calling getValueArrayForSite.
@llvmbot llvmbot added the PGO Profile Guided Optimizations label Jun 14, 2024
@kazutakahirata kazutakahirata requested a review from david-xl June 14, 2024 16:00
@llvmbot
Copy link
Member

llvmbot commented Jun 14, 2024

@llvm/pr-subscribers-pgo

Author: Kazu Hirata (kazutakahirata)

Changes

The new API getValueArrayForSite returns ArrayRef<InstrProfValueData>,
packaging the array length and contents together.

This patch sinks the array length checks just before we check the
contents. This way, we check both the array length and contents
immediately after calling getValueArrayForSite.


Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/95559.diff

1 Files Affected:

  • (modified) llvm/unittests/ProfileData/InstrProfTest.cpp (+14-11)
diff --git a/llvm/unittests/ProfileData/InstrProfTest.cpp b/llvm/unittests/ProfileData/InstrProfTest.cpp
index dae5542290934..038f222117823 100644
--- a/llvm/unittests/ProfileData/InstrProfTest.cpp
+++ b/llvm/unittests/ProfileData/InstrProfTest.cpp
@@ -1381,12 +1381,6 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, value_prof_data_read_write) {
 
   // Now read data from Record and sanity check the data
   ASSERT_EQ(6U, Record.getNumValueSites(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget));
-  ASSERT_EQ(5U, Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 0));
-  ASSERT_EQ(4U, Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 1));
-  ASSERT_EQ(3U, Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 2));
-  ASSERT_EQ(2U, Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 3));
-  ASSERT_EQ(0U, Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 4));
-  ASSERT_EQ(2U, Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 5));
 
   auto Cmp = [](const InstrProfValueData &VD1, const InstrProfValueData &VD2) {
     return VD1.Count > VD2.Count;
@@ -1394,6 +1388,7 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, value_prof_data_read_write) {
 
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD_0(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 0));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD_0, SizeIs(5));
   llvm::sort(VD_0, Cmp);
   EXPECT_STREQ((const char *)VD_0[0].Value, "callee2");
   EXPECT_EQ(1000U, VD_0[0].Count);
@@ -1408,6 +1403,7 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, value_prof_data_read_write) {
 
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD_1(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 1));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD_1, SizeIs(4));
   llvm::sort(VD_1, Cmp);
   EXPECT_STREQ((const char *)VD_1[0].Value, "callee2");
   EXPECT_EQ(VD_1[0].Count, 2500U);
@@ -1420,6 +1416,7 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, value_prof_data_read_write) {
 
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD_2(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 2));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD_2, SizeIs(3));
   llvm::sort(VD_2, Cmp);
   EXPECT_STREQ((const char *)VD_2[0].Value, "callee4");
   EXPECT_EQ(VD_2[0].Count, 5500U);
@@ -1430,20 +1427,23 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, value_prof_data_read_write) {
 
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD_3(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 3));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD_3, SizeIs(2));
   llvm::sort(VD_3, Cmp);
   EXPECT_STREQ((const char *)VD_3[0].Value, "callee3");
   EXPECT_EQ(VD_3[0].Count, 2000U);
   EXPECT_STREQ((const char *)VD_3[1].Value, "callee2");
   EXPECT_EQ(VD_3[1].Count, 1800U);
 
+  ASSERT_THAT(Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 4),
+              SizeIs(0));
+  ASSERT_THAT(Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 5),
+              SizeIs(2));
+
   ASSERT_EQ(Record.getNumValueSites(IPVK_VTableTarget), 4U);
-  ASSERT_EQ(Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_VTableTarget, 0), 5U);
-  ASSERT_EQ(Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_VTableTarget, 1), 4U);
-  ASSERT_EQ(Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_VTableTarget, 2), 3U);
-  ASSERT_EQ(Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_VTableTarget, 3), 2U);
 
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD0(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_VTableTarget, 0));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD0, SizeIs(5));
   llvm::sort(VD0, Cmp);
   EXPECT_EQ(VD0[0].Value, getCalleeAddress(vtable2));
   EXPECT_EQ(VD0[0].Count, 1000U);
@@ -1458,6 +1458,7 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, value_prof_data_read_write) {
 
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD1(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_VTableTarget, 1));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD1, SizeIs(4));
   llvm::sort(VD1, Cmp);
   EXPECT_EQ(VD1[0].Value, getCalleeAddress(vtable2));
   EXPECT_EQ(VD1[0].Count, 2500U);
@@ -1470,6 +1471,7 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, value_prof_data_read_write) {
 
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD2(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_VTableTarget, 2));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD2, SizeIs(3));
   llvm::sort(VD2, Cmp);
   EXPECT_EQ(VD2[0].Value, getCalleeAddress(vtable4));
   EXPECT_EQ(VD2[0].Count, 5500U);
@@ -1480,6 +1482,7 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, value_prof_data_read_write) {
 
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD3(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_VTableTarget, 3));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD3, SizeIs(2));
   llvm::sort(VD3, Cmp);
   EXPECT_EQ(VD3[0].Value, getCalleeAddress(vtable3));
   EXPECT_EQ(VD3[0].Count, 2000U);
@@ -1525,7 +1528,6 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, symtab_mapping) {
 
   // Now read data from Record and sanity check the data
   ASSERT_EQ(Record.getNumValueSites(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget), 6U);
-  ASSERT_EQ(Record.getNumValueDataForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 0), 5U);
 
   // Look up the value correpsonding to the middle of a vtable in symtab and
   // test that it's the hash of the name.
@@ -1543,6 +1545,7 @@ TEST(ValueProfileReadWriteTest, symtab_mapping) {
   };
   SmallVector<InstrProfValueData> VD_0(
       Record.getValueArrayForSite(IPVK_IndirectCallTarget, 0));
+  ASSERT_THAT(VD_0, SizeIs(5));
   llvm::sort(VD_0, Cmp);
   ASSERT_EQ(VD_0[0].Value, 0x2000ULL);
   ASSERT_EQ(VD_0[0].Count, 1000U);

@kazutakahirata kazutakahirata merged commit bbe9119 into llvm:main Jun 14, 2024
6 of 8 checks passed
@kazutakahirata kazutakahirata deleted the cleanup_migrate_getValueArrayForSite_SizeIs branch June 14, 2024 16:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
PGO Profile Guided Optimizations
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants