<html>
  <head>
    <meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
  </head>
  <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
    <p><br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 09/11/2017 10:50 AM, Sean Silva via
      llvm-dev wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHnXoan7mnPDHzD6nd6aTBwx9DZP=cSwkL3hvk-Qdj2+jBYmug@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
      <div dir="ltr"><br>
        <div class="gmail_extra"><br>
          <div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 8:14 AM,
            Daniel Neilson via llvm-dev <span dir="ltr"><<a
                moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org" target="_blank">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>></span>
            wrote:<br>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><br>
              Just thinking out loud…. I’m really not familiar with the
              vast majority of what instcombine does, so please excuse
              me if my naiveté is too obvious. I can’t help but notice
              all of the uses of ‘and’ in Daniel B’s description of what
              instcombine is right now:<br>
              <span class="gmail-"><br>
                > On Sep 8, 2017, at 11:27 PM, Daniel Berlin via
                llvm-dev <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                  href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>>
                wrote:<br>
                ><br>
                > FWIW, Before getting to "how to do it", I think
                InstCombine needs an actual goal.<br>
                > Right now it's "do a bunch of instruction
                combination and canonicalization and random kinds of
                semi-local optimization with some weird analysis and
                other stuff in the middle.<br>
                > Iterate this as hard as we can"<br>
                > Nobody can really draw any real dividing line for
                what should be there or not except based on how easy or
                expensive it is to shove it in.<br>
                > That's a recipe for pass creep.<br>
                <br>
              </span>This makes me wonder… is it sensible to be talking
              about splitting up instcombine into multiple separate
              passes? Would such a thing even be possible? For example,
              split by functionality into separate passes that each do
              one of:<br>
              * instruction combinations<br>
              * canonicalization<br>
              * semi-local optimizations<br>
              * etc…<br>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    The problem is that all of these are really the same thing. Almost
    all canonicalizations are also simplifications, the common
    underlying factor being that they're mostly-local transformations
    that likely enable other optimizations.<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHnXoan7mnPDHzD6nd6aTBwx9DZP=cSwkL3hvk-Qdj2+jBYmug@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <br>
               Or something like that.<br>
              <br>
               As separate passes, each would probably have a natural
              way to be implemented effectively and those
              implementations might vary.<br>
            </blockquote>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>One obstacle to that is that currently instcombine has
              an internal fixed-point iteration that it does.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>So when splitting it into separate passes we would need
              to either add fixed-point iteration to the pass manager
              running the separate instcombine passes (extending the
              pass management in this way is doable and has been
              explored in the past, e.g. <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7iP43an5_Q">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7iP43an5_Q</a>
              ) or demonstrate/measure that we don't regress without the
              fixed-point iteration across separate instcombine passes.</div>
          </div>
        </div>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    I agree, but I'll add that I view the fixed-point iteration here to
    be an asset. It increases the robustness and consistency of the
    compiler, and allows later passes to depend on the canonicalization
    (*) without worrying about phase-ordering effects (**).<br>
    <br>
    (*) In my experience, the largest problem we have in this regard is
    our lack of documentation on what our canonical form is.<br>
    (**) To be clear, we still have phase-ordering effects within
    InstCombine. Using a better system for dealing with the rewriting
    rules, I hope, will help. Nevertheless, these effects are much rarer
    than if we ran InstCombine only as discrete passe. <br>
    <br>
    I'd like to see us do more fixed-point iteration in our optimization
    pipeline, and our past work has shown this would be practical (i.e.,
    only a few iterations will be needed in practice), but even that
    won't remove the advantages of using a fixed-point iteration within
    InstCombine.<br>
    <br>
    Regardless, I think that if we had a model for what InstCombine did
    (i.e., as a graph-rewriting system), then it would be clear what
    could be part of that system and what couldn't. Otherwise, I think
    that the real challenge here is figuring out the underlying
    structural foundations to make the process efficient and sound.<br>
    <br>
     -Hal<br>
    <br>
    <blockquote
cite="mid:CAHnXoan7mnPDHzD6nd6aTBwx9DZP=cSwkL3hvk-Qdj2+jBYmug@mail.gmail.com"
      type="cite">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <div class="gmail_extra">
          <div class="gmail_quote">
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>-- Sean Silva</div>
            <div> </div>
            <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px
              0.8ex;border-left:1px solid
              rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
              <br>
              -Daniel<br>
              <br>
              ---<br>
              Daniel Neilson, Ph.D.<br>
              Azul Systems<br>
              <div class="gmail-HOEnZb">
                <div class="gmail-h5"><br>
                  ______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
                  LLVM Developers mailing list<br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a><br>
                  <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                    href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev"
                    rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a><br>
                </div>
              </div>
            </blockquote>
          </div>
          <br>
        </div>
      </div>
      <br>
      <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
      <br>
      <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org">llvm-dev@lists.llvm.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev">http://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev</a>
</pre>
    </blockquote>
    <br>
    <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
Hal Finkel
Lead, Compiler Technology and Programming Languages
Leadership Computing Facility
Argonne National Laboratory</pre>
  </body>
</html>