[SamplePGO] Stale profile matching(part 2)

Part 2 of https://reviews.llvm.org/D147456
Use callee name on IR as an anchor to match the call target/inlinee name in the profile. The advantages of this in particular:
- Different from the traditional way of encoding hash signatures to every block that would affect binary/profile size and build speed, it doesn't require any additional information for this, all the data is already in the IR and profiles.
- Effective for current nested profile layout in which once a callsite is mismatched all the inlinee's profiles are dropped.
**The input of the algorithm:**
- IR locations: the anchor is the callee name of direct callsite.
- Profile locations: the anchor is the call target name for `BodySample`s or inlinee's profile name for `CallsiteSamples`.
The two lists are populated by parsing the IR and profile and both can be generalized as a sequence of locations with an optional anchor.
For example: say location `1.2(foo)` refers to a callsite at `1.2` with callee name `foo` and `1.3` refers to a non-directcall location `1.3`.
```
// The current build source code:
   int main() {
1.     ...
2.     foo();
3.     ...
4      ...
5.     ...
6.     bar();
7.     ...
   }
```
IR locations are populated and simplified as: `[1, 2(foo), 3, 5, 6(bar), 7]`.
```
; The "stale" profile:
main:350:1
 1: 1
 2: 3
 3: 100 foo:100
 4: 2
 7: 2
 8: 200 bar:200
 9: 30
```
Profile locations are populated and simplified as `[1, 2, 3(foo), 4, 7, 8(bar), 9]`
**Matching heuristic:**
- Match all the anchors in lexical order first.
- Match non-anchors evenly between two anchors: Split the non-anchor range, the first half is matched based on the start anchor, the second half is matched based on the end anchor.
So the example above is matched like:
```
   [1,    2(foo), 3,  5,  6(bar), 7]
    |     |       |   |     |     |
   [1, 2, 3(foo), 4,  7,  8(bar), 9]
```
3 -> 4 matching is based on anchor `foo`, 5 -> 7 matching is based on anchor `bar`.
The output mapping of matching is [2->3, 3->4, 5->7, 6->8, 7->9].

For the implementation, the anchors are saved in a map for fast look-up. The result mapping is saved into `IRToProfileLocationMap`(see https://reviews.llvm.org/D147456) and distributed to all FunctionSamples(`distributeIRToProfileLocationMap`)

**Clang-self build benchmark: **
Current build version: clang-10
The profiled version:  clang-9
Results compared to a refresh profile(collected profile on clang-10) and to be fair, we invalidated new functions' profiles(both refresh and stale profile use the same profile list).
1) Regression to using refresh profile with this off : -3.93%
2) Regression to using refresh profile with this on  : -1.1%
So this algorithm can recover ~72% of the regression.
**Internal(Meta) large-scale services.**
we saw one real instance of a 3 week stale profile., it delivered a ~1.8% win.

**Notes or future work:**
- Classic AutoFDO support: the current version only supports pseudo-probe, but I believe it's not hard to extend to classic line-number based AutoFDO since pseudo-probe and line-number are shared the LineLocation structure.
- The fuzzy matching is an open-ended area and there could be more heuristics to try out, but since the current version already recovers a reasonable percentage of regression(with some pseudo probe order change, it can recover close to 90%), I'm submitting the patch for review and we will try more heuristics in future.
- Profile call target name are only available when the call is hit by samples, the missing anchor might mislead the matching, this can be mitigated in llvm-profgen to generate the call target for the zero samples.
- This doesn't handle function name mismatch, we plan to solve it in future.

Reviewed By: hoy, wenlei

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D147545