<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Aug 2, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Das, Dibyendu <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Dibyendu.Das@amd.com" target="_blank">Dibyendu.Das@amd.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I don’t think its true for all kinds of dead code elimination </span></p></div></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">because there may be instructions which do execute but can be proven to be redundant/dead.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This definition of dead code covers all redundant code (IE subsumes redundancy elimination of literally all forms).</div><div>I'd agree that under this definition, you can improve runtime.</div><div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Lets say you do a bit-width analysis ( something along the lines of
<a href="http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~seth/papers/budiu-tr00.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~seth/papers/budiu-tr00.pdf</a> ). You may be able to remove some instructions and get runtime benefit ( which may have nothing to do with IC miss behavior because these were
instructions that were getting executed ).</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I personally would not class this as dead code elimination :)</div><div> </div><div><br></div><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"> <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Anyway, the advanced analyses for DCE may not apply to this RFC. So we may not see any runtime benefits.</span></p></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It would not apply in all versions of this patch so far, so unless David has other tricks up his sleeve :)</div><div><br></div><div> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple"><div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d">
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Daniel Berlin [mailto:<a href="mailto:dberlin@dberlin.org" target="_blank">dberlin@dberlin.org</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, August 02, 2016 9:26 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Das, Dibyendu <<a href="mailto:Dibyendu.Das@amd.com" target="_blank">Dibyendu.Das@amd.com</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> David Callahan <<a href="mailto:dcallahan@fb.com" target="_blank">dcallahan@fb.com</a>>; <a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>; Nadav Rotem <<a href="mailto:nrotem@fb.com" target="_blank">nrotem@fb.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [llvm-dev] [LLVM] New Dead Code Elimination<u></u><u></u></span></p><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">You should not expect pretty much any perf uplifts from any DCE, ever.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">If it does, it's mostly luck (better cache behavior, etc).<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">You should expect size improvements ;)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 10:51 PM, Das, Dibyendu via llvm-dev <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>> wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d">What kind of perf. uplifts are expected and in what benchmarks/apps ?</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;color:#1f497d"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> llvm-dev [mailto:<a href="mailto:llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev-bounces@lists.llvm.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>David Callahan via llvm-dev<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, August 01, 2016 11:15 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> LLVM Dev Mailing list <<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>><br>
<b>Cc:</b> Nadav Rotem <<a href="mailto:nrotem@fb.com" target="_blank">nrotem@fb.com</a>><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [llvm-dev] [LLVM] New Dead Code Elimination</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I have a rewrite of the aggressive dead code elimination pass which handles control flow and allows may-be-infinite loops to be removed under optional
flag. Chandler suggested rather than a large change a series of small changes and, while that may not get us to small changes easily, there has been no further commentary on the diff:
<a href="https://reviews.llvm.org/D18762" target="_blank">https://reviews.llvm.org/D18762</a>. Given that, I will plan on proposing a series of diffs and would like to recruit some people who are interested in the change to help review those changes.
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">I expect to stage as follows:</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="color:black">1.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><span style="color:black">Rewrite base algorithm to introduce data structures needed to hold extra information (no functional change)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="color:black">2.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><span style="color:black">Rewrite base algorithm to allow removing of control flow (under option, off by default). This variant will not be correct in the general case.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="color:black">3.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><span style="color:black">Code to rewrite the control flow graph and remove dead basic blocks</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="color:black">4.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><span style="color:black">Identify Phi nodes with non-instruction reaching definitions and keep the associated source block live. Identify Phi nodes with multiple-live values from dead blocks</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="color:black">5.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><span style="color:black">Remove unreachable code discovered by post-order traversal to avoid.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:.25in;text-indent:.25in">
<span style="color:black"> (code is functionally correct at this point)</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="color:black">6.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><span style="color:black">Use post-order traversal to identify loop bottoms. By default this will be kept live but include switch to allow loops to be removed.
</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p><span style="color:black">7.</span><span style="font-size:7.0pt;color:black">
</span><span style="color:black">Improve handling of live values out of dead regions</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Please respond if you are willing to help or have suggestions on staging or approach.</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black"> </span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">Thanks</span><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="color:black">David</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>