# CURRENT_TASK（Rolling, SSOT）

## SSOT（今の正）

- **性能SSOT**: `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh`（WS=400, RUNS=10, サイズ16..1040強制、*_ONLY強制OFF）
- **経路確認**: `scripts/run_mixed_observe_ssot.sh`（OBSERVE専用、throughput比較には使わない）
- **buildモード**: `docs/analysis/SSOT_BUILD_MODES.md`
- **外部比較（短時間）**: `docs/analysis/PHASE92_TCMALLOC_GAP_TRIAGE_SSOT.md`（LD_PRELOAD同一バイナリ + hakmem_force_libc 切り分け）

## Phase 87-88（終了: NO-GO）

**Status**: ✅ **OBSERVE verified** + ❌ **Phase 88 NO-GO**

### Phase 87: Inline Slots Verification

**Initial Finding (Wrong)**: Standard binary showed PUSH TOTAL/POP TOTAL = 0
- **Root Cause**: ENV ドリフト（`HAKMEM_BENCH_MIN_SIZE/MAX_SIZE` 漏れ）
  - 修正: `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh` でサイズ範囲を強制固定（MIN=16, MAX=1040）
  - `HAKMEM_BENCH_C5_ONLY=0`, `HAKMEM_BENCH_C6_ONLY=0`, `HAKMEM_BENCH_C7_ONLY=0` 強制

**Corrected Finding (OBSERVE binary)** - 20M ops Mixed SSOT WS=400:
```
PUSH TOTAL:   C4=687,564  C5=1,373,605  C6=2,750,862  TOTAL=4,812,031 ✓
POP TOTAL:    C4=687,564  C5=1,373,605  C6=2,750,862  TOTAL=4,812,031 ✓
PUSH FULL:    0 (0.00%)
POP EMPTY:    168 (0.003%)

JUDGMENT: ✓ [C] LEGACY used AND C4/C5/C6 INLINE SLOTS ACTIVE → Ready for Phase 88/89
```

### Phase 88: Batch Drain Optimization

**Overflow Analysis**:
- POP EMPTY rate: 168 / 4,812,031 = **0.003%** ← 極小
- PUSH FULL rate: 0 / 4,812,031 = **0%** ← 起きていない
- **Decision**: バッチ化しても速さは動かない（overflow がほぼ起きていない）

**Phase 88 Decision**: **NO-GO（凍結）**
- Rationale: 0.003% overflow 率では layout tax リスク > 期待値
- Infrastructure: 観測用 telemetry は残す（将来の WS/容量 変更時に再検証可能）

**Artifacts Created**:
- Telemetry box: `core/box/tiny_inline_slots_overflow_stats_box.h/c`
- Phase 87 results: `docs/analysis/PHASE87_OBSERVATION_RESULTS.md`
- SSOT 強化: `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh`, `scripts/run_mixed_observe_ssot.sh`
- ENV ドリフト防止ドキュメント: `docs/analysis/BENCH_REPRODUCIBILITY_SSOT.md`

**Key Learning**:
- "踏んでるか確定"には **OBSERVE バイナリ + total counters** が必須
- 観測と性能測定は分離（telemetry overhead を避ける）
- ENV ドリフト（MIN/MAX サイズ, CLASS_ONLY） = 経路を変える主要因
**Follow-up Fix (SSOT hardening)**:
- `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh` now forces `HAKMEM_BENCH_MIN_SIZE=16` / `HAKMEM_BENCH_MAX_SIZE=1040` and disables `HAKMEM_BENCH_C{5,6,7}_ONLY` to prevent path drift.
- New pre-flight helper: `scripts/run_mixed_observe_ssot.sh` (Route Banner + OBSERVE, single run).
 - Overflow stats compile gating fixed (see above).

---

## Phase 89（完了: Bottleneck Analysis & Optimization Roadmap）

**Status**: ✅ **SSOT Measurement Complete** + **3 Optimization Candidates Identified**

### 4-Step SSOT Procedure Completion

**Step 1: OBSERVE Binary Preflight**
- Binary: `bench_random_mixed_hakmem_observe` (with telemetry enabled)
- Inline slots verification: ✓ PUSH TOTAL = 4.81M, POP EMPTY = 0.003% (confirmed active & healthy)
- Throughput (with telemetry): 51.52M ops/s

**Step 2: Standard 10-run Baseline**
- Binary: `bench_random_mixed_hakmem` (clean, no telemetry)
- 10-run SSOT results: **51.36M ops/s** (CV: 0.7%, very stable)
  - Range: 50.74M - 51.73M
  - **Decision**: This is baseline for bottleneck analysis

**Step 3: FAST PGO 10-run Comparison**
- Binary: `bench_random_mixed_hakmem_minimal_pgo` (PGO optimized)
- 10-run SSOT results: **54.16M ops/s** (CV: 1.5%, acceptable)
  - Range: 52.89M - 55.13M
  - **Performance Gap**: 54.16M - 51.36M = **2.80M ops/s (+5.45%)**
  - This represents the optimization ceiling with current PGO profile

**Step 4: Results Captured**
- Git SHA: e4c5f0535 (master branch)
- Timestamp: 2025-12-18 23:06:01
- System: AMD Ryzen 5825U, 16 cores, 6.8.0-87-generic kernel
- Files: `docs/analysis/PHASE89_SSOT_MEASUREMENT.md`

### Perf Analysis & Top Bottleneck Identification

**Profile Run**: 40M operations (0.78s), 833 perf samples

**Top Functions by CPU Time**:
1. **free** - 27.40% (hottest)
2. main - 26.30% (benchmark loop, not optimizable)
3. **malloc** - 20.36% (hottest)
4. malloc.cold - 10.65% (cold path, avoid optimizing)
5. free.cold - 5.59% (cold path, avoid optimizing)
6. **tiny_region_id_write_header** - 2.98% (hot, inlining candidate)

**malloc + free combined = 47.76% of CPU time** (already Phase 9/10/78-1/80-1 optimized)

### Top 3 Optimization Candidates (Ranked by Priority)

| Candidate | Priority | Recommendation | Expected Gain | Risk | Effort |
|-----------|----------|-----------------|----------------|------|--------|
| **tiny_region_id_write_header always_inline** | **HIGH** | **PURSUE** | +1-2% | LOW | 1-2h |
| malloc/free branch reduction | MEDIUM | DEFER | +2-3% | MEDIUM | 20-40h |
| Cold-path optimization | LOW | **AVOID** | +1% | HIGH | 10-20h |

**Candidate 1: tiny_region_id_write_header always_inline (2.98% CPU)**
- Current: Selective inlining from `core/region_id_v6.c`
- Proposal: Force `always_inline` for hot-path call sites
- **Layout Impact**: MINIMAL (no code bulk, maintains I-cache discipline)
- **Recommendation**: YES - PURSUE
  - Estimated timeline: Phase 90
  - Implementation: 1-2 lines, add `__attribute__((always_inline))` wrapper

**Candidate 2: malloc/free branch reduction (47.76% CPU)**
- Current: Phase 9/10/78-1/80-1/83-1 already optimized
- Observation: 56.4M branch-misses (branch prediction pressure)
- Proposal: Pre-compute routing tables (like Phase 85 approach)
- **Risk**: Code bloat, potential layout tax regression (Phase 85 was NO-GO)
- **Recommendation**: DEFER
  - Wait for workload characteristics that justify complexity
  - Current gains saturation point reached

---

## Phase 91（終了: NEUTRAL / 凍結）

**Status**: ⚪ **NEUTRAL**（C6 IFL: +0.38% / 10-run）→ default OFF で保持

- 目的: C6 inline slots の FIFO を intrusive LIFO に置換して fixed tax を削る
- 結果（SSOT 10-run）:
  - Control（`HAKMEM_TINY_C6_INLINE_SLOTS_IFL=0`）mean 52.05M
  - Treatment（`HAKMEM_TINY_C6_INLINE_SLOTS_IFL=1`）mean 52.25M
  - Δ **+0.38%**（GO閾値 +1.0% 未達）
- 判定: **凍結（research box）**
  - 回帰は無し、ただし ROI が小さいため C5/C4 へ展開しない

---

## Phase 92（開始予定）

**Status**: 🔍 **次フェーズ計画中**

**目的**: tcmalloc 性能ギャップ（hakmem: 52M vs tcmalloc: 58M, -12.8%）を短時間で原因分類

**実施予定**:
1. ケース A：小 vs 大オブジェクト分離テスト（C6-only vs C7-only）
2. ケース B：Inline Slots vs Unified Cache 分離テスト
3. ケース C：LIFO vs FIFO 比較
4. ケース D：Pool size sensitivity テスト

**期間**: 1-2h（短時間 Triage）
**出力**: Primary bottleneck 特定 → 次の Candidate 選定

**References**:
- Triage Plan: `docs/analysis/PHASE92_TCMALLOC_GAP_TRIAGE_SSOT.md`

---

**Candidate 3: Cold-path de-duplication (16.24% CPU)**
- Current: malloc.cold (10.65%) + free.cold (5.59%) explicitly separated
- Rationale: Separation improves hot-path I-cache utilization
- **Recommendation**: AVOID
  - Aligns with user's "layout tax 回避" principle
  - Optimizing cold paths would ADD code to hot path (violates design)

### Key Performance Insights

**FAST PGO vs Standard (+5.45%) breakdown**:
- PGO branch prediction optimization: ~3%
- Code layout optimization: ~2%
- Inlining decisions: ~0.5%

**Conclusion**: Standard build limited by branch prediction pressure; further gains require architectural tradeoffs.

**Inline Slots Health**: Working perfectly - 0.003% overflow rate confirms no bottleneck

### References & Artifacts

- SSOT Measurement: `docs/analysis/PHASE89_SSOT_MEASUREMENT.md`
- Bottleneck Analysis: `docs/analysis/PHASE89_BOTTLENECK_ANALYSIS.md`
- Perf Stats: `docs/analysis/PHASE89_PERF_STAT.txt`
- Scripts: `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh`, `scripts/run_mixed_observe_ssot.sh`

---

## Phase 86（終了: NO-GO）

**Status**: ❌ NO-GO (+0.25% improvement, threshold: +1.0%)

**A/B Test (10-run SSOT)**:
- Control:   51,750,467 ops/s (CV: 2.26%)
- Treatment: 51,881,055 ops/s (CV: 2.32%)
- Delta: +0.25% (mean), -0.15% (median)

**Summary**: Free path legacy mask (mask-only) optimization for LEGACY classes.
- Design: Bitset mask + direct call (avoids Phase 85's indirect call problems)
- Implementation: Correct (0x7f mask computed, C0-C6 optimized)
- Root cause: Competing Phase 9/10 optimizations (+1.89%) already capture most benefit
- Conclusion: Free path optimization layer has reached practical ceiling

---

## 0) 今の「正」（SSOT）

- **現行 SSOT（Phase 89 capture / Git SHA: e4c5f0535）**:
  - Standard（`./bench_random_mixed_hakmem`）10-run mean: **51.36M ops/s**（CV ~0.7%）
  - FAST PGO minimal（`./bench_random_mixed_hakmem_minimal_pgo`）10-run mean: **54.16M ops/s**（CV ~1.5% / Standard比 +5.45%）
  - OBSERVE（`./bench_random_mixed_hakmem_observe`）: 51.52M ops/s（telemetry込み、性能比較の正ではない）
  - SSOT capture: `docs/analysis/PHASE89_SSOT_MEASUREMENT.md`
- **性能最適化の判断の正**: 同一バイナリ A/B（ENVトグル）＝ `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh`
- **mimalloc/tcmalloc 参照の正**: reference（別バイナリ/LD_PRELOAD）＝ `docs/analysis/ALLOCATOR_COMPARISON_SSOT.md`
- **スコアカード（目標/現在値の正）**: `docs/analysis/PERFORMANCE_TARGETS_SCORECARD.md`（Phase 89 SSOT を現行 snapshot として反映済み）
  - Phase 66/68/69（60M〜62M台）は **historical**（現 HEAD と直接比較しない。比較するなら rebase を取る）
- **次フェーズ（設計見直し）**: `docs/analysis/PHASE90_STRUCTURAL_REVIEW_AND_GAP_TRIAGE_SSOT.md`
- **Mixed 10-run SSOT（ハーネス）**: `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh`
  - デフォルト `BENCH_BIN=./bench_random_mixed_hakmem`（Standard）
  - FAST PGO は `BENCH_BIN=./bench_random_mixed_hakmem_minimal_pgo` を明示する
  - 既定: `ITERS=20000000 WS=400`、`HAKMEM_WARM_POOL_SIZE=16`、`HAKMEM_TINY_C4_INLINE_SLOTS=1`、`HAKMEM_TINY_C5_INLINE_SLOTS=1`、`HAKMEM_TINY_C6_INLINE_SLOTS=1`、`HAKMEM_TINY_INLINE_SLOTS_FIXED=1`、`HAKMEM_TINY_INLINE_SLOTS_SWITCHDISPATCH=1`
  - cleanenv で固定OFF（漏れ防止）: `HAKMEM_TINY_INLINE_SLOTS_SWITCHDISPATCH_FIXED=0`（Phase 83-1 NO-GO / research）

## 0a) ころころ防止（最低限の SSOT ルール）

- **hakmem は必ず `HAKMEM_PROFILE` を明示**する（未指定だと route が変わり、数値が破綻しやすい）。
  - 推奨: `HAKMEM_PROFILE=MIXED_TINYV3_C7_SAFE`（Speed-first）
- 比較は目的で runner を分ける:
  - hakmem SSOT（最適化判断）: `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh`
  - allocator reference（短時間）: `scripts/run_allocator_quick_matrix.sh`
  - allocator reference（layout差を最小化）: `scripts/run_allocator_preload_matrix.sh`
- 再現ログを残す（数%を詰めるときの最低限）:
  - `scripts/bench_ssot_capture.sh`
  - `HAKMEM_BENCH_ENV_LOG=1`（CPU governor/EPP/freq を記録）
  - 外部相談（貼り付けパケット）: `docs/analysis/FREE_PATH_REVIEW_PACKET_CHATGPT.md`（生成: `scripts/make_chatgpt_pro_packet_free_path.sh`）

## 0b) Allocator比較（reference）

- allocator比較（system/jemalloc/mimalloc/tcmalloc）は **reference**（別バイナリ/LD_PRELOAD → layout差を含む）。
  - SSOT: `docs/analysis/ALLOCATOR_COMPARISON_SSOT.md`
  - **Quick（Random Mixed 10-run）**: `scripts/run_allocator_quick_matrix.sh`
    - **重要**: hakmem は `HAKMEM_PROFILE=MIXED_TINYV3_C7_SAFE` を明示し、`scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh` 経由で走らせる（PROFILE漏れで数値が壊れるため）。
  - **Same-binary（推奨, layout差を最小化）**: `scripts/run_allocator_preload_matrix.sh`
    - `bench_random_mixed_system` を固定し、`LD_PRELOAD` で allocator を差し替える。
    - 注記: hakmem の **linked benchmark**（`bench_random_mixed_hakmem*`）とは経路が異なる（LD_PRELOAD=drop-in wrapper なので別物）。
  - **Scenario CSV（small-scale reference）**: `scripts/bench_allocators_compare.sh`

## 1) 迷子防止（経路/観測）

“経路が踏まれていない最適化” を防ぐための最小手順。

- **Route Banner（経路の誤認を潰す）**: `HAKMEM_ROUTE_BANNER=1`
  - 出力: Route assignments（backend route kind）+ cache config（`unified_cache_enabled` / `warm_pool_max_per_class`）
- **Refill観測のSSOT**: `docs/analysis/PHASE70_REFILL_OBSERVABILITY_PREREQS_SSOT.md`
  - WS=400（Mixed SSOT）では miss が極小 → `unified_cache_refill()` 最適化は **凍結（ROIゼロ）**

## 2) 直近の結論（要点だけ）

- **Phase 69（WarmPool sweep）**: `HAKMEM_WARM_POOL_SIZE=16` が **強GO（+3.26%）**、baseline 昇格済み。
  - 設計: `docs/analysis/PHASE69_REFILL_TUNING_0_DESIGN.md`
  - 結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE69_REFILL_TUNING_1_RESULTS.md`
- **Phase 70（観測SSOT）**: 統計の見える化/前提ゲート確立。WS=400 SSOT では refill は冷たい。
  - SSOT: `docs/analysis/PHASE70_REFILL_OBSERVABILITY_PREREQS_SSOT.md`
- **Phase 71/73（WarmPool=16 の勝ち筋確定）**: 勝ち筋は **instruction/branch の微減**（perf stat で確定）。
  - 詳細: `docs/analysis/PHASE70_71_WARMPOOL16_ANALYSIS.md`
- **Phase 72（ENV knob ROI枯れ）**: WarmPool=16 を超える ENV-only 勝ち筋なし → **構造（コード）で攻める段階**。
- **Phase 78-1（構造）**: Inline Slots enable の per-op ENV gate を固定化し、同一バイナリ A/B で **GO（+2.31%）**。
  - 結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE78_1_INLINE_SLOTS_FIXED_MODE_RESULTS.md`
- **Phase 80-1（構造）**: Inline Slots の if-chain を switch dispatch 化し、同一バイナリ A/B で **GO（+1.65%）**。
  - 結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE80_INLINE_SLOTS_SWITCH_DISPATCH_1_RESULTS.md`
- **Phase 83-1（構造）**: Switch dispatch の per-op ENV gate を固定化 (Phase 78-1 パターン適用), 同一バイナリ A/B で **NO-GO（+0.32%, branch reduction negligible）**。
  - 結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE83_1_SWITCH_DISPATCH_FIXED_RESULTS.md`
  - 原因: lazy-init pattern が既に最適化済み（per-op overhead minimal）→ fixed mode の ROI 極小

## 2a) 次の大方針（設計の順番、SSOT）

目的: “mimalloc/tcmalloc が強すぎる”状況でも、Box Theory（境界1箇所・戻せる・可視化最小・fail-fast）を崩さず **+5–10%** を狙う。

優先順（Google/TCMalloc の芯を参考にする）:

1. **ThreadCache overflow のバッチ化（最優先）**
   - inline slots（C4/C5/C6）が満杯になったときの overflow を「1個ずつ」ではなく「まとめて」冷やす
   - 変換点は 1 箇所（flush/drain）に固定
2. **Central/Shared 側のバッチ push/pop（次点）**
   - shared/remote への統合をバッチ化して lock/atomic の回数を減らす
3. **Memory return / footprint policy（運用軸）**
   - Balanced/Lean の勝ち筋（syscall/RSS drift/tail）をSSOT化しつつ、速度を落とさない範囲で攻める

重要: 現状は「設計の芯」を決める段階。実装は **計測で overflow の頻度が十分に高い**ことを確認してから。

## 2b) 次の作業（待機中）

ユーザーが別エージェント（Claude Code）に依頼した処理が完了するまで待機する。
完了後に着手するチェック（最短で必要な2つ）:

- **inline slots overflow 率の計測**（C4/C5/C6 の FULL/overflow 回数・割合）
- **overflow 先のコストの定量化**（overflow 時に落ちる関数の perf stat / perf report）

これが揃ったら Phase 86（Overflow batch design）へ進む。

## 3) 運用ルール（Box Theory + layout tax 対策）

- 変更は必ず **箱 + 境界1箇所 + ENVで戻せる** で積む（Fail-fast、最小可視化）。
- A/B は **同一バイナリでENVトグル**が原則（別バイナリ比較は layout が混ざる）。
- SSOT運用（ころころ防止）: `docs/analysis/PHASE75_6_SSOT_POLICY_FAST_PGO_VS_STANDARD.md`
- “削除して速い” は封印（link-out/大削除は layout tax で符号反転しやすい）→ **compile-out** を優先。
  - 診断: `scripts/box/layout_tax_forensics_box.sh` / `docs/analysis/PHASE67A_LAYOUT_TAX_FORENSICS_SSOT.md`
- 研究箱の棚卸しSSOT: `docs/analysis/RESEARCH_BOXES_SSOT.md`
  - ノブ一覧: `scripts/list_hakmem_knobs.sh`

## 5) 研究箱の扱い（freeze方針）

- **Phase 79-1（C2 local cache）**: `HAKMEM_TINY_C2_LOCAL_CACHE=0/1`
  - 結果: +0.57%（NO-GO, threshold +1.0% 未達）→ **research box freeze**
  - SSOT/cleanenv では **default OFF**（`scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh` が `0` を強制）
  - 物理削除はしない（layout tax リスク回避）
  - **Phase 82（hardening）**: hot path から C2 local cache を完全除外（環境変数を立てても alloc/free hot では踏まない）
    - 記録: `docs/analysis/PHASE82_C2_LOCAL_CACHE_HOTPATH_EXCLUSION.md`

- **Phase 85（Free path commit-once, LEGACY-only）**: `HAKMEM_FREE_PATH_COMMIT_ONCE=0/1`
  - 結果: **NO-GO（-0.86%）** → **research box freeze（default OFF）**
  - 理由: Phase 10（MONO LEGACY DIRECT）と効果が被り、さらに間接呼び出し/配置の税が増えた
  - 記録: `docs/analysis/PHASE85_FREE_PATH_COMMIT_ONCE_RESULTS.md`

## 4) 次の指示書（Active）

### Phase 74（構造）: UnifiedCache hit-path を短くする ✅ **P1 (LOCALIZE) 凍結**

**前提**:
- WS=400 SSOT では UnifiedCache miss が極小 → refill最適化は ROIゼロ。
- WarmPool=16 の勝ちは instruction/branch 微減 → hit-path を短くするのが正攻法。

**Phase 74-1: LOCALIZE (ENV-gated)** ✅ **完了 (NEUTRAL +0.50%)**
- ENV: `HAKMEM_TINY_UC_LOCALIZE=0/1`
- Runtime branch overhead で instructions/branches **増加** (+0.7%/+0.4%)
- 判定: **NEUTRAL (+0.50%)**

**Phase 74-2: LOCALIZE (compile-time gate)** ✅ **完了 (NEUTRAL -0.87%)**
- Build flag: `HAKMEM_TINY_UC_LOCALIZE_COMPILED=0/1` (default 0)
- Runtime branch 削除 → instructions/branches **改善** (-0.6%/-2.3%) ✓
- しかし **cache-misses +86%** (register pressure / spill) → throughput **-0.87%**
- 切り分け成功: **LOCALIZE本体は勝ち、cache-miss 増加で相殺**
- 判定: **NEUTRAL (-0.87%)** → **P1 (LOCALIZE) 凍結**

**結論**:
- P1 (LOCALIZE) は default OFF で凍結（dependency chain 削減の ROI 低い）
- 次: **Phase 74-3 (P0: FASTAPI)** へ進む

**Phase 74-3: P0 (FASTAPI)** ✅ **完了 (NEUTRAL +0.32%)**

**Goal**: `unified_cache_enabled()` / `lazy-init` / `stats` 判定を **hot loop の外へ追い出す**

**Approach**:
- `unified_cache_push_fast()` / `unified_cache_pop_fast()` API 追加
- 前提: "valid/enabled/no-stats" を caller 側で保証
- Fail-fast: 想定外の状態なら slow path へ fallback（境界1箇所）
- ENV gate: `HAKMEM_TINY_UC_FASTAPI=0/1` (default 0, research box)

**Results** (10-run Mixed SSOT, WS=400):
- Throughput: **+0.32%** (NEUTRAL, below +1.0% GO threshold)
- cache-misses: **-16.31%** (positive signal, insufficient throughput gain)

**判定**: **NEUTRAL (+0.32%)** → **P0 (FASTAPI) 凍結**

**参考**:
- 設計: `docs/analysis/PHASE74_UNIFIEDCACHE_HITPATH_STRUCTURAL_OPT_0_DESIGN.md`
- 指示書: `docs/analysis/PHASE74_UNIFIEDCACHE_HITPATH_STRUCTURAL_OPT_1_NEXT_INSTRUCTIONS.md`
- 結果 (P1/P0): `docs/analysis/PHASE74_UNIFIEDCACHE_HITPATH_STRUCTURAL_OPT_2_RESULTS.md`

---

## Phase 75（構造）: Hot-class Inline Slots (P2) ✅ **完了（Standard A/B）**

**Goal**: C4-C7 の統計分析 → targeted optimization 戦略決定

**前提** (Phase 74 learnings):
- UnifiedCache hit-path optimization の ROI が低い ← register pressure / cache-miss effects
- 次の軸: **per-class 特性を活用** → TLS-direct inline slots で branch elimination

**Phase 75-0: Per-Class Analysis** ✅ **完了**

Per-class Unified-STATS (Mixed SSOT, WS=400, HAKMEM_MEASURE_UNIFIED_CACHE=1):

| Class | Capacity | Occupied | Hits | Pushes | Total Ops | Hit % | % of C4-C7 |
|-------|----------|----------|------|--------|-----------|-------|-----------|
| C6 | 128 | 127 | 2,750,854 | 2,750,855 | **5,501,709** | 100% | **57.2%** |
| C5 | 128 | 127 | 1,373,604 | 1,373,605 | **2,747,209** | 100% | **28.5%** |
| C4 | 64 | 63 | 687,563 | 687,564 | **1,375,127** | 100% | **14.3%** |
| C7 | ? | ? | ? | ? | **?** | ? | **?** |

**Key findings**:
1. C6 圧倒的支配: 57.2% の操作 (2.75M hits)
2. 全クラス 100% hit rate (refill inactive in SSOT)
3. Cache occupancy near-capacity (98-99%)

**Phase 75-1: C6-only Inline Slots** ✅ **完了 (GO +2.87%)**

**Approach**: Modular box theory design with single decision point at TLS init

**Implementation** (5 new boxes + test script):
- ENV gate box: `HAKMEM_TINY_C6_INLINE_SLOTS=0/1` (lazy-init, default OFF)
- TLS extension: 128-slot ring buffer (1KB per thread, zero overhead when OFF)
- Fast-path API: `c6_inline_push()` / `c6_inline_pop()` (always_inline, 1-2 cycles)
- Integration: Minimal (2 boundary points: alloc/free for C6 class only)
- Backward compatible: Legacy code intact, fail-fast to unified_cache

**Results** (10-run Mixed SSOT, WS=400):
- Baseline (C6 inline OFF): **44.24 M ops/s**
- Treatment (C6 inline ON): **45.51 M ops/s**
- Delta: **+1.27 M ops/s (+2.87%)**

**Decision**: ✅ **GO** (exceeds +1.0% strict threshold)

**Mechanism**: Branch elimination on unified_cache for C6 (57.2% of C4-C7 ops)

**参考**:
- Per-class分析: `docs/analysis/PHASE75_PERCLASS_ANALYSIS_0_SSOT.md`
- 結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE75_C6_INLINE_SLOTS_1_RESULTS.md`

---

**Phase 75-2: C5 Inline Slots** ✅ **完了 (GO +1.10%)**

**Goal**: C5-only isolated measurement (28.5% of C4-C7) for individual contribution

**Approach**: Replicate C6 pattern with careful isolation
- Add C5 ring buffer (128 slots, 1KB TLS)
- ENV gate: `HAKMEM_TINY_C5_INLINE_SLOTS=0/1` (default OFF)
- Test strategy: C5-only (baseline C5=OFF+C6=ON, treatment C5=ON+C6=ON)
- Integration: alloc/free boundary points (C5 FIRST, then C6, then unified_cache)

**Results** (10-run Mixed SSOT, WS=400):
- Baseline (C5=OFF, C6=ON): **44.26 M ops/s** (σ=0.37)
- Treatment (C5=ON, C6=ON): **44.74 M ops/s** (σ=0.54)
- Delta: **+0.49 M ops/s (+1.10%)**

**Decision**: ✅ **GO** (C5 individual contribution validated)

**Cumulative Performance**:
- Phase 75-1 (C6): +2.87%
- Phase 75-2 (C5 isolated): +1.10%
- Combined potential: ~+3.97% (if additive)

**参考**:
- 実装詳細: `docs/analysis/PHASE75_2_C5_INLINE_SLOTS_IMPLEMENTATION.md`

---

**Phase 75-3: C5+C6 Interaction Test (4-Point Matrix A/B)** ✅ **完了 (STRONG GO +5.41%)**

**Goal**: Comprehensive interaction test + final promotion decision

**Approach**: 4-point matrix A/B test (single binary, ENV-only configuration)
- Point A (C5=0, C6=0): Baseline
- Point B (C5=1, C6=0): C5 solo
- Point C (C5=0, C6=1): C6 solo
- Point D (C5=1, C6=1): C5+C6 combined

**Results** (10-run per point, Mixed SSOT, WS=400):
- **Point A (baseline)**: 42.36 M ops/s
- **Point B (C5 solo)**: 43.54 M ops/s (+2.79% vs A)
- **Point C (C6 solo)**: 44.25 M ops/s (+4.46% vs A)
- **Point D (C5+C6)**: 44.65 M ops/s (+5.41% vs A) **[MAIN TARGET]**

**Additivity Analysis**:
- Expected additive (B+C-A): 45.43 M ops/s
- Actual (D): 44.65 M ops/s
- Sub-additivity: **1.72%** (near-perfect additivity, minimal negative interaction)

**Perf Stat Validation (D vs A)**:
- Instructions: -6.1% (function call elimination confirmed)
- Branches: -6.1% (matches instruction reduction)
- Cache-misses: -31.5% (improved locality, NOT +86% like Phase 74-2)
- Throughput: +5.41% (net positive)

**Decision**: ✅ **STRONG GO (+5.41%)**
- D vs A: +5.41% >> 3.0% threshold
- Sub-additivity: 1.72% << 20% acceptable
- Phase 73 thesis validated: instructions/branches DOWN, throughput UP

**Promotion Completed**:
1. `core/bench_profile.h`: Added C5+C6 defaults to `bench_apply_mixed_tinyv3_c7_common()`
2. `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh`: Added C5+C6 ENV defaults
3. C5+C6 inline slots now **promoted to preset defaults** for MIXED_TINYV3_C7_SAFE

**Phase 75 Complete**: C5+C6 inline slots (129-256B) deliver +5.41% proven gain **on Standard binary**（`bench_random_mixed_hakmem`）。
- FAST PGO baseline（スコアカード）を更新する前に、`BENCH_BIN=./bench_random_mixed_hakmem_minimal_pgo` で **同条件の A/B（C5/C6 OFF/ON）** を再計測すること。

### Phase 75-4（FAST PGO rebase）✅ 完了

- 結果: **+3.16% (GO)**（4-point matrix、outlier 除外後）
- 詳細: `docs/analysis/PHASE75_4_FAST_PGO_REBASE_RESULTS.md`
- 重要: Phase 69 の FAST baseline (62.63M) と比較して **現行 FAST PGO baseline が大きく低い**疑い（PGO profile staleness / training mismatch / build drift）

### Phase 75-5（PGO 再生成）✅ 完了（NO-GO on hypothesis, code bloat root cause identified）

目的:
- C5/C6 inline slots を含む現行コードに対して PGO training を再生成し、Phase 69 クラスの FAST baseline を取り戻す。

結果:
- PGO profile regeneration の効果は **限定的** (+0.3% のみ)
- Root cause は **PGO profile mismatch ではなく code bloat** (+13KB, +3.1%)
- Code bloat が layout tax を引き起こし IPC collapse (-7.22%), branch-miss spike (+19.4%) → net -12% regression

**Forensics findings** (`scripts/box/layout_tax_forensics_box.sh`):
- Text size: +13KB (+3.1%)
- IPC: 1.80 → 1.67 (-7.22%)
- Branch-misses: +19.4%
- Cache-misses: +5.7%

**Decision**:
- FAST PGO は code bloat に敏感 → **Track A/B discipline 確立**
- Track A: Standard binary で implementation decisions (SSOT for GO/NO-GO)
- Track B: FAST PGO で mimalloc ratio tracking (periodic rebase, not single-point decisions)

**参考**:
- 詳細結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE75_5_PGO_REGENERATION_RESULTS.md`
- 指示書: `docs/analysis/PHASE75_5_PGO_REGENERATION_NEXT_INSTRUCTIONS.md`

---

### Phase 76（構造継続）: C4-C7 Remaining Classes ✅ **Phase 76-1 完了 (GO +1.73%)**

**前提** (Phase 75 complete):
- C5+C6 inline slots: +5.41% proven (Standard), +3.16% (FAST PGO)
- Code bloat sensitivity identified → Track A/B discipline established
- Remaining C4-C7 coverage: C4 (14.29%), C7 (0%)

**Phase 76-0: C7 Statistics Analysis** ✅ **完了 (NO-GO for C7 P2)**

**Approach**: OBSERVE run to measure C7 allocation patterns in Mixed SSOT
**Results**: C7 = **0% operations** in Mixed SSOT workload
**Decision**: NO-GO for C7 P2 optimization → proceed to C4

**参考**:
- 結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE76_0_C7_STATISTICS_ANALYSIS.md`

**Phase 76-1: C4 Inline Slots** ✅ **完了 (GO +1.73%)**

**Goal**: Complete C4-C6 inline slots trilogy, targeting remaining 14.29% of C4-C7 operations

**Implementation** (modular box pattern):
- ENV gate: `HAKMEM_TINY_C4_INLINE_SLOTS=0/1` (default OFF → ON after promotion)
- TLS ring: 64 slots, 512B per thread (lighter than C5/C6's 1KB)
- Fast-path API: `c4_inline_push()` / `c4_inline_pop()` (always_inline)
- Integration: C4 FIRST → C5 → C6 → unified_cache (alloc/free cascade)

**Results** (10-run Mixed SSOT, WS=400):
- Baseline (C4=OFF, C5=ON, C6=ON): **52.42 M ops/s**
- Treatment (C4=ON, C5=ON, C6=ON): **53.33 M ops/s**
- Delta: **+0.91 M ops/s (+1.73%)**

**Decision**: ✅ **GO** (exceeds +1.0% threshold)

**Promotion Completed**:
1. `core/bench_profile.h`: Added C4 default to `bench_apply_mixed_tinyv3_c7_common()`
2. `scripts/run_mixed_10_cleanenv.sh`: Added `HAKMEM_TINY_C4_INLINE_SLOTS=1` default
3. C4 inline slots now **promoted to preset defaults** alongside C5+C6

**Coverage Summary (C4-C7 complete)**:
- C6: 57.17% (Phase 75-1, +2.87%)
- C5: 28.55% (Phase 75-2, +1.10%)
- **C4: 14.29% (Phase 76-1, +1.73%)**
- C7: 0.00% (Phase 76-0, NO-GO)
- **Combined C4-C6: 100% of C4-C7 operations**

**Estimated Cumulative Gain**: +7-8% (C4+C5+C6 combined, assumes near-perfect additivity like Phase 75-3)

**参考**:
- 結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE76_1_C4_INLINE_SLOTS_RESULTS.md`
- C4 box files: `core/box/tiny_c4_inline_slots_*.h`, `core/front/tiny_c4_inline_slots.h`, `core/tiny_c4_inline_slots.c`

---

**Phase 76-2: C4+C5+C6 Comprehensive 4-Point Matrix** ✅ **完了 (STRONG GO +7.05%, super-additive)**

**Goal**: Validate cumulative C4+C5+C6 interaction and establish SSOT baseline for next optimization axis

**Results** (4-point matrix, 10-run each):
- Point A (all OFF): 49.48 M ops/s (baseline)
- Point B (C4 only): 49.44 M ops/s (-0.08%, context-dependent regression)
- Point C (C5+C6 only): 52.27 M ops/s (+5.63% vs A)
- Point D (all ON): **52.97 M ops/s (+7.05% vs A)** ✅ **STRONG GO**

**Critical Discovery**:
- C4 shows **-0.08% regression in isolation** (C5/C6 OFF)
- C4 shows **+1.27% gain in context** (with C5+C6 ON)
- **Super-additivity**: Actual D (+7.05%) exceeds expected additive (+5.56%)
- **Implication**: Per-class optimizations are **context-dependent**, not independently additive

**Sub-additivity Analysis**:
- Expected additive: 52.23 M ops/s (B + C - A)
- Actual: 52.97 M ops/s
- Gain: **-1.42% (super-additive!)** ✓

**Decision**: ✅ **STRONG GO**
- D vs A: +7.05% >> +3.0% threshold
- Super-additive behavior confirms synergistic gains
- C4+C5+C6 locked to SSOT defaults

**参考**:
- 詳細結果: `docs/analysis/PHASE76_2_C4C5C6_MATRIX_RESULTS.md`

---

### 🟩 完了：C4-C7 Inline Slots Optimization Stack

**Per-class Coverage Summary (Final)**:
- C6 (57.17%): +2.87% (Phase 75-1)
- C5 (28.55%): +1.10% (Phase 75-2)
- C4 (14.29%): +1.27% in context (Phase 76-1/76-2)
- C7 (0.00%): NO-GO (Phase 76-0)
- **Combined C4-C6: +7.05% (Phase 76-2 super-additive)**

**Status**: ✅ **C4-C7 Optimization Complete** (100% coverage, SSOT locked)

---

### 🟥 次のActive（Phase 77+）

**オプション**:

**Option A: FAST PGO Periodic Tracking** (Track B discipline)
- Regenerate PGO profile with C4+C5+C6=ON if code bloat accumulates
- Monitor mimalloc ratio progress (secondary metric)
- Not a decision point per se, but periodic maintenance

**Option B: Phase 77 (Alternative Optimization Axis)**
- Explore beyond per-class inline slots
- Candidates:
  - Allocation fast-path optimization (call elimination)
  - Metadata/page lookup (table optimization)
  - C3/C2 class strategies
  - Warm pool tuning (beyond Phase 69's WarmPool=16)

**推奨**: **Option B へ進む**（Phase 77+）
- C4-C7 optimizations are exhausted and locked
- Ready to explore new optimization axes
- Baseline is now +7.05% stronger than Phase 75-3

**参考**:
- C4-C7 完全分析: `docs/analysis/PHASE76_2_C4C5C6_MATRIX_RESULTS.md`
- Phase 75-3 参考 (C5+C6): `docs/analysis/PHASE75_3_C5_C6_INTERACTION_RESULTS.md`

## 5) アーカイブ

- 詳細ログ: `CURRENT_TASK_ARCHIVE_20251210.md`
- 整理前スナップショット: `docs/analysis/CURRENT_TASK_ARCHIVE.md`