[cfe-dev] JumboSupport: making unity builds easier in Clang

David Blaikie via cfe-dev cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
Tue Apr 10 07:44:05 PDT 2018


What sort of significant investment are you thinking of regarding modules -
the build system support, I would imagine, wouldn't be any less than the
support being proposed here for jumbo builds, no?

But making header files modules-clean is some work, for sure. I'd imagine
doing this the same way we're kind of motivated to do it inside Google -
provide the feature, then migrate the most impactful libraries.
Teams/projects then have an incentive to cleanup/modularize code in
whatever areas are the most important.

But, yeah, I see where you're coming from - that maybe a tidy jumbo build
support might not be too bad.

On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 7:34 AM Nico Weber <thakis at chromium.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 10:27 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I haven't looked at the patches in detail - but generally a jumbo build
>> feels like a bit of a workaround & maybe there are better long-term
>> solutions that might fit into the compiler.
>>
>
> I feel the same way. However, modules need significant investment to get
> going, and people do jumbo builds if we want it or not. WebKit is doing the
> same thing for example
> https://blogs.gnome.org/mcatanzaro/2018/02/17/on-compiling-webkit-now-twice-as-fast/
>
> People will use this, if we want them to or not (I have some influence in
> chrome land and wasn't able to talk them out of it, since it does provide
> huge benefits), and the workarounds needed without compiler support are
> gnarly.
>
> So I think we might want to revisit our "you don't really want this"
> stance on this topic we've had historically and instead try to make this
> work well.
>
>
>> A few sort of background questions:
>>
>> * Have you tried Clang header modules (
>> https://clang.llvm.org/docs/Modules.html )? (explicit (granted, explicit
>> might only be practical at the moment using Google's internal version of
>> Bazel - but you /might/ get some comparison numbers from a Google Chrome
>> developer) and implicit)
>>   * The doc talks about maybe disabling jumbo builds for a single target
>> for developer efficiency, with the risk that a header edit would maybe be
>> worse for the developer than the jumbo build - this is where modules would
>> help as well, since it doesn't have this tradeoff property of two different
>> dimensions of "more work" you have to choose from.
>> * I was going to ask about the lack of parallelism in a jumbo build - but
>> reading the doc I see it's not a 'full' jumbo build, but chunkifying the
>> build - so there's still some/enough parallelism. Cool :)
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 5:12 AM Mostyn Bramley-Moore via cfe-dev <
>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Hi,I am a member of a small group of Chromium developers who are
>>> working on adding a unity build[1] setup to Chromium[2], in order to reduce
>>> the project's long and ever-increasing compile times.  We're calling these
>>> "jumbo" builds, because this term is not as overloaded as "unity".We're
>>> slowly making progress, but find that a lot of our time is spent renaming
>>> things in anonymous namespaces- it would be much simpler if it was possible
>>> to automatically treat these as if they were file-local.   Jens Widell has
>>> put together a proof-of-concept which appears to work reasonably well, it
>>> consists of a clang plugin and a small clang
>>> patch:https://github.com/jensl/llvm-project-20170507/tree/wip/jumbo-support/v1
>>> <https://github.com/jensl/llvm-project-20170507/tree/wip/jumbo-support/v1>https://github.com/jensl/llvm-project-20170507/commit/a00d5ce3f20bf1c7a41145be8b7a3a478df9935f
>>> <https://github.com/jensl/llvm-project-20170507/commit/a00d5ce3f20bf1c7a41145be8b7a3a478df9935f>After
>>> building clang and the plugin, you generate jumbo source files that look
>>> like:jumbo_source_1.cc:#pragma jumbo#include
>>> "real_source_file_1.cc"#include "real_source_file_2.cc"#include
>>> "real_source_file_3.cc"Then, you compile something like this:clang++ -c
>>> jumbo_source_1.cc -Xclang -load -Xclang lib/JumboSupport.so -Xclang
>>> -add-plugin -Xclang jumbo-supportThe plugin gives unique names[3] to the
>>> anonymous namespaces without otherwise changing their semantics, and also
>>> #undef's macros defined in each top-level source file before processing the
>>> next top-level source file.  That way header files can still define macros
>>> that are used in multiple source files in the jumbo translation unit.
>>> Collisions between macros defined in header files and names used in other
>>> headers and other source files are still possible, but less likely.To show
>>> how much these two changes help, here's a patch to make Chromium's network
>>> code build in jumbo
>>> mode:https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/966523
>>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/966523>
>>> (+352/-377 lines)And here's the corresponding patch using the
>>> proof-of-concept JumboSupport
>>> plugin:https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/962062
>>> <https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromium/src/+/962062> (+53/-52
>>> lines)It seems clear that the version using the JumboSupport plugin would
>>> require less effort to create, review and merge into the codebase.  We have
>>> a few other feature ideas, but these two changes seem to do most of the
>>> work for us.So now we're trying to figure out the best way forward- would a
>>> feature like this be welcome to the Clang project?  And if so, how would
>>> you recommend that we go about it? We would prefer to do this in a way that
>>> does not require a locally patched Clang and could live with building a
>>> custom plugin, although implementing this entirely in Clang would be even
>>> better.Thanks,-Mostyn.[1] If you're not familiar with unity builds, the
>>> idea is to compile multiple source files per compiler invocation, reducing
>>> the overhead of processing header files (which can be surprisingly high).
>>> We do this by taking a list of the source files in a target and generating
>>> "jumbo" source files that #include multiple "real" source files, and then
>>> we feed these jumbo files to the compiler one at a time.  This way, we
>>> don't prevent the usage of valuable build tools like ccache and icecc that
>>> only support a single source file on the command line.[2] Daniel Bratell
>>> has a summary of our progress jumbo-ifying the Chromium codebase
>>> here:https://docs.google.com/document/d/19jGsZxh7DX8jkAKbL1nYBa5rcByUL2EeidnYsoXfsYQ/edit#
>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/19jGsZxh7DX8jkAKbL1nYBa5rcByUL2EeidnYsoXfsYQ/edit#>[3]
>>> The JumboSupport plugin assigns names to the anonymous namespaces in a
>>> given file:  foo::(anonymous namespace)::bar is replaced with a symbol name
>>> of the form foo::__anonymous_<number>::bar where <number> is unique to the
>>> file within the jumbo translation unit.  Due to the internal linkage of
>>> these symbols, <number> does not need to be unique across multiple object
>>> files/jumbo source files.*
>>> --
>>> Mostyn Bramley-Moore
>>> Vewd Software
>>> mostynb at vewd.com <mostynb at opera.com>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> cfe-dev mailing list
>>> cfe-dev at lists.llvm.org
>>> http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev
>>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20180410/03b1cdad/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the cfe-dev mailing list