20 audited attempts, 0 shipped false accepts, 3 verified auto-accepted wins (tokei class-5: +10.7%, +3.7%, +9.9%; ~1.25x vs upstream with Phase-0 wins). Independent 20-way adversarial re-audit (phase2-final-audit workflow) confirmed every verdict follows its evidence, correct equivalence tier, no harness-gaming, ledger append-only intact. Closeout changes: - case study: full 20-row attempt table, scoreboard, corrected comrak-010 CI upper bound (+12.1%, was +12.2%), exit-criteria section flipped to ALL MET, OS-isolation gap marked closed. - CLAUDE.md Current-phase line: Phase 2 complete, next Phase 3. - verdict: derive the ledger 'phase' column from the run_id namespace (phaseN-*) instead of the hardcoded 1 the re-audit flagged; historical rows are immutable and stay as written (run_id prefix is authoritative). Co-Authored-By: Claude Fable 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01EcKPWQ3MQD4NdEHwar96u2
6.6 KiB
hotpath — profile-guided optimization agent
Working name. Rename freely; nothing depends on it.
Mission
An agent that profiles real binaries and services, isolates hot paths, proposes optimizations, and accepts a change only when (a) behavioral-equivalence gates pass and (b) the benchmark improvement is statistically significant on trusted infrastructure. Output: verified performance deltas translated into ROI reports nobody can dispute.
Full engineering spec: SPEC.md. Read it before starting any phase.
Non-negotiables (re-read every session)
- No unverified performance claims. A change without passing equivalence gates AND a significant bench delta does not exist. Discard it. Log it.
- Measure before optimizing. No patch is proposed until profile data identifies the hot path. Never trust a single benchmark run.
- Cheap wins first, always. Build flags → LTO → PGO → allocator swap → then code changes. Check the ledger before re-attempting any class of change on a target.
- Equivalence gates are hard gates. Changes touching floating-point ordering, concurrency primitives, or anything UB-adjacent are NEVER auto-accepted — verdict is
needs-human-review. - Every attempt goes in the ledger, including failures and rejections. Failures are future training data.
- The agent never modifies the trust layer.
crates/,config/,corpora/, and upstream test suites are read-only to the agent. Patches may touch only allowlisted paths undertargets/<name>/. See SPEC.md §10. - Sandbox everything. Target code runs only inside no-network containers. Never on the host.
- Statistical bar: accept only if the bootstrap 95% CI lower bound of speedup ≥ threshold in
config/accept.toml(default 2%), from interleaved A/B runs on the same pinned hardware.
Architecture map
crates/bench-runner— trust layer: containerized, CPU-pinned, interleaved A/B benchmarking with bootstrap confidence intervals and A/A self-testscrates/diff-test— behavioral equivalence: upstream test suite + golden I/O replay + differential fuzzing of changed functions + sanitizerscrates/ledger— append-only SQLite record of every attempt: hypothesis, patch, gate results, bench deltas, verdict, costcrates/report— ROI generator: cores saved × $/core-hr, latency percentile deltas, CIs, workload caveats printed on every numberagent/— Claude Agent SDK (Python) loop, prompts, tool definitionstargets/— vendored OSS targets for case studies (permissive licenses only)playbook/— optimization classes, ordered, with preconditions and known risksresults/— generated reports and flamegraphs
Current phase
Phase 2 COMPLETE — all SPEC §5 exit criteria met. The unattended profile→hypothesize→patch→gated-verdict loop ran on comrak and tokei via the Claude Agent SDK (agent/hotpath_agent/loop.py, model claude-fable-5) over a stdio MCP server wrapping the seven harness tools, behind OS-level isolation (scripts/agent-isolated.sh mountns/user modes, just isolation-check 19/19). 20 audited attempts, 0 shipped false accepts, 3 verified auto-accepted wins — all tokei, class 5 (phase2-tokei-001 +10.7%, -003 +3.7%, -008 +9.9%; compounded ~1.25× vs upstream v14.0.0 with the Phase-0 wins), each fuzz-clean (scripts/diff-fuzz-*.py, 10k inputs) and ASan/LSan-clean. One pipeline accept (phase2-comrak-010, a ManuallyDrop teardown skip) was overturned by the 100% human audit on a LeakSanitizer flag before shipping; the fix made verdict run ASan/LSan on every would-be accept and cap flagged wins at needs-human-review (SPEC §8). Every row re-audited twice — incrementally during the grind, then a 20-way adversarial refute-the-verdict fan-out (phase2-final-audit workflow): all confirmed, no gaming, ledger append-only intact. Case study: results/phase2/case-study-agent-loop.md. Next: Phase 3 (playbook classes 3–7, coz, C/C++ targets, 3–5 public case studies — SPEC.md §5).
Commands
Fill these in as the harness is built; keep them current:
just profile <target> # perf record + flamegraph for a target's benchmark workload
just bench <target> <ref> # interleaved A/B: pristine baseline vs working tree
just gates <target> # test suite + golden replay + diff-fuzz + sanitizers
just verdict <target> # runs gates + bench, writes ledger row, prints verdict
just report <run-id> # ROI report from ledger
just aa <target> # A/A calibration run (must show null result)
Built so far (command-level, pre-target-integration):
just build / test / lint # trust-layer workspace: cargo build/test/clippy+fmt
just aa [cmd] # A/A self-test of bench-runner on a shell command
just compare <a> <b> # interleaved A/B of two shell commands, bootstrap CI
just gates <target> # corpus pin + upstream tests + golden replay
just pin-check <target> # verify corpus MANIFEST.sha256
just calibrate <cmd> <out> # automated A/A + regression-injection calibration
just verdict <t> <bin> ... # gates + bench vs pristine-rebuilt baseline + ledger row
cargo run -p harnessd # agent IPC daemon: six-tool JSON surface (SPEC §3.5)
Definition of done — one optimization attempt
- Hypothesis logged in ledger before patching
- Patch touches only allowlisted paths under
targets/<name>/ - Upstream test suite green
- Golden replay byte-identical (or within the target's explicit FP tolerance policy)
- Differential fuzz on changed functions: no divergence (60s or 10k iterations minimum)
- ASan + UBSan clean; TSan if the patch touches anything threaded
- Interleaved A/B bench passes the CI-lower-bound threshold
- Ledger row written with verdict and full evidence
- If FP-ordering / concurrency / UB-adjacent: verdict
needs-human-review, never auto-accept
An attempt that fails any gate is a valid, complete outcome — write the ledger row and move on. Do not iterate on a rejected patch more than twice without a new hypothesis.
Conventions
- Rust workspace (edition 2021+) for all harness crates;
justfor task running - Python 3.11+ for
agent/; Claude Agent SDK — verify current package name and API at https://docs.claude.com/en/docs/claude-code/overview before scaffolding - Every number shown to a human carries its confidence interval and workload description. No naked percentages, ever.
- Commit style:
phase0:,bench:,gates:,agent:,playbook:prefixes - When in doubt between shipping a feature and hardening measurement, harden measurement. The product is trust.