CS293S SVN & DVN & GCSE Yufei Ding Review of Last Class - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
CS293S SVN & DVN & GCSE Yufei Ding Review of Last Class - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
CS293S SVN & DVN & GCSE Yufei Ding Review of Last Class Removing redundant expressions DAG: version tracking Linear representation: (local) value numbering Scope of optimization Basic block, Extended basic block,
2
Review of Last Class
Removing redundant expressions DAG: version tracking Linear representation: (local) value numbering Scope of optimization Basic block, Extended basic block, …
3
Renaming + Value Numbering
Example (continued)
With VNs a03 ¬ x01 + y02 z20 ¬ y02 * b03 ¬ x01 + y02 a14 ¬ 17 * c03 ¬ x01 + y02 Original Code a0 ¬ x0 + y0 z0 ¬ y0 * b0 ¬ x0 + y0 a1 ¬ 17 * c0 ¬ x0 + y0 Renaming:
- Give each value a
unique name Rewritten a0 ¬ x0 + y0 z0 ¬ y0 * b0 ¬ a0 a1 ¬ 17 * c0 ¬ a0 Result:
- a0 is available
- Rewriting just
works Hash Table for Rewritten {<1,x0>, <2,y0>, <3,a0>} {<1,x0 >, <2,y0>, <3,a0>} {<1,x0 >, <2,y0>, <3,a0>, <4,17>} {<1,x0 >, <2,y0>, <3,a0>, <4,17>}
4
Missed opportunities
(need stronger methods) m ¬ a + b n ¬ a + b
A
p ¬ c + d r ¬ c + d
B
y ¬ a + b z ¬ c + d
G
q ¬ a + b r ¬ c + d
C
e ¬ b + 18 s ¬ a + b u ¬ e + f
D
e ¬ a + 17 t ¬ c + d u ¬ e + f
E
v ¬ a + b w ¬ c + d x ¬ e + f
F
Local Value Numbering
1 basic block at a time (1 entry point + 1 exit point)
- Strong local results
No cross-block effects
Can we find set of blocks that also ensures the sequential execution order in the basic block?
5
Topics of This Class
Scope of optimization Basic block -> Local value numbering Extended basic block (EBB) -> Superlocal value numbering Dominator -> Dominator-based value numbering Global Common Subexpression Elimination (GCSE) More close to DAG-based methods Work on lexical notation instead of expression values.
Extended basic block (EBB)
An EBB is a set of blocks B1, B2, ..., Bn, where Bi, 2<= i <= n has a
unique predecessor, which is in the EBB. (If a block is added to the EBB, all of its predecessors must be included. Bi is the one with on predecessor, i.e., the root of the EBB).
m ¬ a + b n ¬ a + b
A
p ¬ c + d r ¬ c + d
B
y ¬ a + b z ¬ c + d
G
q ¬ a + b r ¬ c + d
C
e ¬ b + 18 s ¬ a + b u ¬ e + f
D
e ¬ a + 17 t ¬ c + d u ¬ e + f
E
v ¬ a + b w ¬ c + d x ¬ e + f
F
7
Superlocal Value Numbering
m ¬ a + b n ¬ a + b
A
p ¬ c + d r ¬ c + d
B
y ¬ a + b z ¬ c + d
G
q ¬ a + b r ¬ c + d
C
e ¬ b + 18 s ¬ a + b u ¬ e + f
D
e ¬ a + 17 t ¬ c + d u ¬ e + f
E
v ¬ a + b w ¬ c + d x ¬ e + f
F
- 1. First find the maximum EBB:
ABCDE, F, G
- 2. Apply local method to EBBs’ paths
- Do {A,B}, {A,C,D}, {A,C,E}, {F}, {G}
8
Implementation
Reuse the value numbering results of some common blocks for
efficiency
Which necessitates the undoing of a block’s effect After {A,C,D}, it must recreate the state of {A,C} before
processing E.
Options:
1. Record the state of the tables at each block boundary, and restore the state when needed
- 2. Walking backward and undo the effect. Need
record the “lost” information.
- 3. Scoped hash tables (Lowest cost)
keep the table produced at the current block
9
Scoped Value Table
m ¬ a + b n ¬ a + b
A
p ¬ c + d r ¬ c + d
B
y ¬ a + b z ¬ c + d
G
r ¬ c + d q ¬ a + b
C
e ¬ b + 18 s ¬ a + b u ¬ e + f
D
t ¬ c + d u ¬ a + b
E
v ¬ a + b w ¬ c + d x ¬ e + f
F
a->1 b->2 1+2->3 m->3 n->3 c->4 d->5 4+5->6 r->6 q->3 t->6 u->3 c->4 d->5 4+5->6 p->6 r->6
10
Rewritten
a ¬ b + c e ¬ b - c
b -> 1 c -> 2 1 + 2 ->3 a -> 3 1->b 2->c 3->a
d ¬ b - c f ¬ b - c
1-2 -> 4 e -> 4
Scoped rewritten table
4 -> e 4 -> d 1-2 -> 4 d-> 4 f-> 4
d ¬ b - c f ¬ d
11
Rewritten
a ¬ b + c a ¬ 17 e ¬ b + c d ¬ b + c
Renaming is still needed. But does it work in all scenarios?
a1 ¬ b1 + c1 a2 ¬ 17 e1 ¬ b1 + c1 d1 ¬ b1 + c1
Extra Complexity
12
a1 ¬ b + c a3 ¬ 17 a2 ¬ a1 + c d ¬ a + c
?
13
SSA (Single Static Assignment) Name Space
Two principles
Each name is defined by exactly one operation Each operand refers to exactly one definition
To reconcile these principles with real code
Insert f-functions at merge points to reconcile name space
x ¬ ... x ¬ ... ... ¬ x + ... x0 ¬ ... x1 ¬ ... x2 ¬f(x0,x1) ¬ x2 + ... becomes
Another SSA Example
14
x ¬ ... x ¬ ... ... ¬ x + ... x3 ¬ ... x4 ¬ ... x5 ¬f(x3,x4) ¬ x5 + ... becomes x ¬ x + ... x1 ¬f(x0,x5) x2 ¬ x1 + ...
Detail: CT-2ndEd: Section 5.4.2; CT-1stEd: Section 5.5.
15 This is in SSA Form
Superlocal Value Numbering
m0 ¬ a + b n0 ¬ a + b
A
p0 ¬ c + d r0 ¬ c + d
B
r2 ¬ f(r0,r1) y0 ¬ a + b z0 ¬ c + d
G
q0 ¬ a + b r1 ¬ c + d
C
e0 ¬ b + 18 s0 ¬ a + b u0 ¬ e + f
D
e1 ¬ a + 17 t0 ¬ c + d u1 ¬ e + f
E
e3 ¬ f(e0,e1) u2 ¬ f(u0,u1) v0 ¬ a + b w0 ¬ c + d x0 ¬ e + f
F 1.Build SSA form 2.Find EBBs 3.Apply value numbering to each path in each EBB using scoped hash tables
16 This is in SSA Form
Superlocal Value Numbering
m0 ¬ a + b n0 ¬ a + b
A
p0 ¬ c + d r0 ¬ c + d
B
r2 ¬ f(r0,r1) y0 ¬ a + b z0 ¬ c + d
G
q0 ¬ a + b r1 ¬ c + d
C
e0 ¬ b + 18 s0 ¬ a + b u0 ¬ e + f
D
e1 ¬ a + 17 t0 ¬ c + d u1 ¬ e + f
E
e3 ¬ f(e0,e1) u2 ¬ f(u0,u1) v0 ¬ a + b w0 ¬ c + d x0 ¬ e + f
F With all the bells & whistles
- Find more redundancy
- Pay little additional cost
- Still does nothing for F & G
Dominator-Based Value Numbering
17
18
Regional (Dominator-based) Methods
Dominators of b: all blocks that dominate b if every path from the entry of the graph to b goes through
a, then a is one of b’s dominator.
The full set of dominators for b is denoted by DOM(b). Strict Dominators: If a dominators b and a ≠ b, then we say a strictly dominates
b.
Immediate Dominator: The immediate dominator of b is the strict dominator of b
that is closest to b. It is denoted IDOM(b).
Example
m ¬ a + b n ¬ a + b
A
p ¬ c + d r ¬ c + d
B
y ¬ a + b z ¬ c + d
G
q ¬ a + b r ¬ c + d
C
e ¬ b + 18 s ¬ a + b u ¬ e + f
D
e ¬ a + 17 t ¬ c + d u ¬ e + f
E
v ¬ a + b w ¬ c + d x ¬ e + f
F
BLOCK A B C D E F G DOM IDOM
20
Dominator-Based Value Numbering
Basic strategy: use table from IDom(x ) to
start value numbering x
Use C for F and A for G Imposes a Dom-based application
- rder
m0 ¬ a + b n0 ¬ a + b
A
p0 ¬ c + d r0 ¬ c + d
B
r2 ¬ f(r0,r1) y0 ¬ a + b z0 ¬ c + d
G
q0 ¬ a + b r1 ¬ c + d
C
e0 ¬ b + 18 s0 ¬ a + b u0 ¬ e + f
D
e1 ¬ a + 17 t0 ¬ c + d u1 ¬ e + f
E
e3 ¬ f(e0,e1) u2 ¬ f(u0,u1) v0 ¬ a + b w0 ¬ c + d x0 ¬ e + f
F
SSA Resolves Name Conflicts
21
a ¬ b + c b ¬ 17 d ¬ b - c e ¬ b + c a ¬ b0 + c b1 ¬ 17 d ¬ b0 - c b2 ¬f(b0,b1) e ¬ b2 + c
Summary
Two methods in a scope beyond a basic block Superlocal value numbering (SVN)
Value numbering across basic blocks
Dominator-based value numbering (DVN)
Uses dominance information to handle join points in CFG
They can be used together First Build SSA Do SVN Do DVN with the value tables built in SVN reused
22
Build SSA form is the prerequisite for both!
Examples
23
e = c + d; f = c + d; g = c + d; x = a + b; c = a - b;
The first data-flow problem A global method
24
Global Common Subexpression Elimination (GCSE)
25
Some Expression Sets
For each block b Let AVAIL(b) be the set of expressions available on entry to b. Let EXPRKILL(b) be the set of expressions killed in b. i.e. one or more operands of the expression are redefined in b. !!!! Must consider all expressions in the whole graph. Let DEEXPR(b) include the downward exposed expressions in b. i.e. expressions defined in b and not subsequently killed in b
26
Formula to Compute AVAIL
Now, AVAIL(b) can be defined as:
AVAIL(b) = ÇxÎpred(b) (DEEXPR(x) È (AVAIL(x) Ç EXPRKILL(x) )) preds(b) is the set of b’s predecessors in the control-flow graph. (Again, a predecessor is an immediate parent, not including other ancestors.)
27
Making Theory Concrete
Computing AVAIL for the example
AVAIL(A) = Ø AVAIL(B) = {a+b} È (Ø Ç all) = {a+b} AVAIL(C) = {a+b} AVAIL(D) = {a+b,c+d} È ({a+b} Ç all) = {a+b,c+d} AVAIL(E) = {a+b,c+d} AVAIL(F) = [{b+18,a+b,e+f} È ({a+b,c+d} Ç {all - e+f})] Ç [{a+17,c+d,e+f} È ({a+b,c+d} Ç {all - e+f})] = {a+b,c+d,e+f} AVAIL(G) = [ {c+d} È ({a+b} Ç all)] Ç [{a+b,c+d,e+f} È ({a+b,c+d,e+f} Ç all)] = {a+b,c+d}
m ¬ a + b n ¬ a + b
A
p ¬ c + d r ¬ c + d
B
y ¬ a + b z ¬ c + d
G
q ¬ a + b r ¬ c + d
C
e ¬ b + 18 s ¬ a + b u ¬ e + f
D
e ¬ a + 17 t ¬ c + d u ¬ e + f
E
v ¬ a + b w ¬ c + d x ¬ e + f
F
28
Computing Available Expressions
The Big Picture
- 1. Build a control-flow graph
- 2. Gather the initial data: DEEXPR(b) & EXPRKILL(b)
- 3. Propagate information around the graph, evaluating the
equation Works for loops through an iterative algorithm: finding the fixed- point. All data-flow problems are solved, essentially, this way.
29
First step is to compute DEEXPR & EXPRKILL
Computing Available Expressions
assume a block b with operations o1, o2, …, ok VARKILL ¬ Ø DEEXPR(b) ¬ Ø for i = k to 1 assume oi is “x ¬ y + z” add x to VARKILL if (y Ï VARKILL) and (z Ï VARKILL) then add “y + z” to DEEXPR(b) EXPRKILL(b) ¬ Ø For each expression e for each variable v Î e if v Î VARKILL(b) then EXPRKILL(b) ¬ EXPRKILL(b) È {e}
Many data-flow problems have initial information that costs less to compute
O(k) steps O(N) steps
N is # operations Backward through block
30
Computing Available Expressions
The worklist iterative algorithm
Worklist ¬ { all blocks, bi } while (Worklist ¹ Ø) remove a block b from Worklist recompute AVAIL(b ) as AVAIL(b) = ÇxÎpred(b) (DEEXPR(x) È (AVAIL(x) Ç EXPRKILL(x) )) if ??? then Worklist ¬ ???
31
Computing Available Expressions
The worklist iterative algorithm
Worklist ¬ { all blocks, bi } while (Worklist ¹ Ø) remove a block b from Worklist recompute AVAIL(b ) as AVAIL(b) = ÇxÎpred(b) (DEEXPR(x) È (AVAIL(x) Ç EXPRKILL(x) )) if AVAIL(b ) changed then Worklist ¬ Worklist È successors(b )
- Finds fixed point solution to equation for AVAIL
- That solution is unique
32
Data-flow Analysis
Data-flow analysis is a collection of techniques for compile-time reasoning about run-time flow of values
Almost always involves building a graph Problems are trivial on a basic block Global problems Þ control-flow graph (or
derivative)
Whole program problems Þ call graph (or
derivative)
Usually formulated as a set of simultaneous
equations
33
Replacement step in GCSE
Limit to textually identical expressions
(like DAG, unlike value numbering) e <- d + c
a <- b + c d <- b
e <- b + c a <- b + c f <- b + c
AVAIL(B) ={b+c}
B2 B1 B
AVAIL(B) ={b+c} Cannot find or remove the redundancy! Should replace b+c with ?
34
GCSE (replacement step)
Compute a static mapping from expression to name After analysis & before transformation " block b, " expression eÎAVAIL(b), assign e a global name by hashing on e During transformation step Evaluation of e Þ insert copy name(e) ¬ e (e is not available and needs to be evaluated) Reference to e Þ replace e with name(e) (e is available and should be replaced)
Example
m=a+b; n=c+d; c = 17; q=c+d; p=c+d; r=c+d; name expression t1 a+b t2 c+d B1 B2 B3 B4 t1 = a+b; m=t1; t2=c+d; n=t2; c = 17; t2=c+d; q=t2; t2=c+d; p=t2; r=t2; B1 B2 B3 B4
AVAIL(B4) ={c+d; a+b}
36
GCSE (replacement step)
The major problem with this approach Inserts extraneous copies At all definitions and uses of any eÎAVAIL(b), " b Not a big issue Those extra copies are dead and easy to remove The useful ones often coalesce away
37
Comparison
m ¬ a + b n ¬ a + b
A
p ¬ c + d r ¬ c + d
B
y ¬ a + b z ¬ c + d
G
q ¬ a + b r ¬ c + d
C
e ¬ b + 18 s ¬ a + b u ¬ e + f
D
e ¬ a + 17 t ¬ c + d u ¬ e + f
E
v ¬ a + b w ¬ c + d x ¬ e + f
F
LVN LVN SVN SVN SVN DVN DVN GCSE DVN GCSE
The VN methods are ordered
- LVN ≤ SVN ≤ DVN
- GCSE is different
- Based on names, not value
- But for this particular
example: DVN ≤ GCSE
- Not always!!!!
38
Redundancy Elimination Wrap-up
Conclusions
Redundancy elimination has some depth & subtlety Variations on names, algorithms & analysis
DVN is probably the method of choice
Results quite close to the global methods (± 1%) Cost is low