1 / 23

Value Numbering

Value Numbering. Compiler Baojian Hua bjhua@ustc.edu.cn. Motivation. a = x + y b = x + y x = m + n c = x + y d = x + y e = x f = y g = e + f. a = x + y b = x + y x = m + n c = x + y d = x + y e = x f = y g = e + f. a. x has been re-assigned!. c. c. Motivation. 2. 0.

gitel
Télécharger la présentation

Value Numbering

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Value Numbering Compiler Baojian Hua bjhua@ustc.edu.cn

  2. Motivation a = x + y b = x + y x = m + n c = x + y d = x + y e = x f = y g = e + f a = x + y b = x + y x = m + n c = x + y d = x + y e = x f = y g = e + f a x has been re-assigned! c c

  3. Motivation 2 0 1 a = x + y b = x + y x = m + n c = x + y d = x + y e = x f = y g = e + f 2 0 1 0 x 1 y 5 3 4 2 x+y 2 a 6 5 1 2 b 3 6 5 1 m 4 n 5 5 5 m+n 5 x 1 1 What’s a good data structure for this? 6 5 1

  4. Value Numbering (VN) Algorithm • The algorithm is in Tiger 17.4 • This is a deep semantic property of expressions • In deciding whether “x+y” has been calculated and thus can be avoided, one can NOT just search the expression (by syntax), but some semantic property (here, the value number of “x+y”) • x+y == a+b <==> V(x)=V(a) /\ V(y)=V(b) • A form of abstract interpretation

  5. VN vs CSE • The goals of both of the two algorithms is to perform redundancy elimination • how to detect redundancy: • VN: value number • CSE: available expression analysis • The key difference is the viewpoint to define “redundancy” • VN: semantics • CSE: syntax

  6. VN vs CSE x = a+b VN: Yes! CSE: No! t = a s = b y = t+s But research has revealed that each of them come with pros and cons. So most compilers contain both of them. z = a+b h = a+b Is this a redundancy computation? VN CSE

  7. What about control flow? • VN can be extended to extended basic block (EBB) easily (recall that EBBs form a local tree): • Do a preorder walk of the EBB tree; • Maintain a scoped table along the way (just as we did with the scoped declarations of variables when we discuss elaboration) a = x + y b = x + y x = 2 a = 3 a? d = x + y a? b? Available expression + Reaching expression

  8. Example 0 x 1 y 2 x+y 2 a = x + y a 2 b b = x + y x = 2 a = 3 a d = x + y

  9. Example 0 x 1 y 2 x+y 2 a = x + y a 3 x 4 a b = x + y x = 2 a = 3 d = x + y

  10. GVN: Global Value Numbering • It’s hard to do global value numbering for general CFG • But for SSA, there are good algorithms: • 1988: partition-based algorithm • Alpern ‘88 • 1997: dominator-based algorithm • Kooper ‘97 • 2004: GVN-PRE • implemented in GCC

  11. Partition-based GVN

  12. Partition-based GVN L1: a = x + y L2: L3: x = x + y x = x + y L4: d = x + y

  13. Partition-based GVN L1: • Key observations: • Variables defined with different operators can not be equal (arity), thus we group them in different congruent classes; • for variables with same definition operator, they are equal iff the corresponding operands are from the same congruent classes. a = x + y L2: L3: x1 = x + y x2 = x + y L4: x3=ϕ(x1, x2) d = x3 + y

  14. Partition-based GVN L1: Initial partitions: {a, x1, x2, d} {x3} {x} {y} this partition is based on the expression operators. a = x + y L2: L3: x1 = x + y x2 = x + y a = x+y x1 = x+y x2 = x+y d = x3+y x3 = ϕ(x1, x2) x = ? y = ? L4: x3=ϕ(x1, x2) d = x3 + y In the same set <==> take good chance of equality.

  15. Partition-based GVN L1: {a, x1, x2, d} {x3} {x} {y} a = x + y Now, consider {x}: There are 3 uses of x, but not x3! L2: L3: x1 = x + y x2 = x + y a = x+y x1 = x+y x2 = x+y d = x3+y x3 = ϕ(x1, x2) x = ? y = ? L4: x3=ϕ(x1, x2) d = x3 + y

  16. Partition-based GVN L1: {a, x1, x2, d} {x3} {x} {y} a = x + y Final partitions: {a, x1, x2} {d} {x3} {x} {y} L2: L3: x1 = x + y x2 = x + y a = x+y x1 = x+y x2 = x+y d = x3+y x3 = ϕ(x1, x2) x = ? y = ? L4: x3=ϕ(x1, x2) d = x3 + y a a a As “a” dominates both x1 and x2, so all uses of x1 and x2 can be replaced by “a”.

  17. Partition-based GVN Algorithm partition() P = all initial partitions (a queue of sets) while (!empty(P)) S = deQueue(P) // suppose S is an array n = arity(S[0]) // example: + ==> n == 2 for (i=0 to n-1) use_v[i] = S[0][i]; // calculate use sets T = {S[0]} foreach (x \in s[1]…s[k-1]) // k=|s| for (i=0 to n-1) if (use[x_i]!=use_v[i]) break; T \/= {x} if (T!=S) enQueue (T); enQueue (S-T);

  18. Example L1: i = 1 j = 1 L1: i1 = 1 j1 = 1 L2: L2: i3 = ϕ(i1, i2) j3 = ϕ (j1, j2) L4: L4: L3: L3: i = i+1 j = j+1 i = i+3 j = j+3 i4 = i3+1 j4 = j3+1 i5 = i3+3 j5 = j3+3 L5: L5: i2 = ϕ(i4, i5) j2 = ϕ (j4, j5) CFG SSA

  19. Example L1: i1 = 1 j1 = 1 {i1, j1} {i3, j3} {i4, j4, i5, j5} {i2, j2} // Be partitioned into: {i1, j1} {i3, j3} {i4, j4} {i5, j5} {i2, j2} L2: i3 = ϕ(i1, i2) j3 = ϕ (j1, j2) L4: L3: i4 = i3+1 j4 = j3+1 i5 = i3+3 j5 = j3+3 L5: i2 = ϕ(i4, i5) j2 = ϕ (j4, j5) SSA

  20. Example L1: i = 1 j = 1 L1: i1 = 1 j1 = 1 L2: L2: i3 = ϕ(i1, i2) j3 = ϕ (j1, j2) L4: L4: L3: L3: i = i+1 j = j+1 i = i+3 j = j+3 i4 = i3+1 j4 = j3+1 i5 = i3+3 j5 = j3+3 L5: L5: i2 = ϕ(i4, i5) j2 = ϕ (j4, j5) CFG SSA

  21. Dominator-based GVN

  22. Dominator-based GVN • VN can be extended to GVN • on dominator trees: • Do a (what order?) walk of the dominator tree; • Maintain a scoped table along the way (just as we did with the scope declarations of variables) • for each block B, do VN as before, for a successor S of B, modify the ϕarguments L1: 2 0 1 a = x + y L2: L3: x1 = x + y x2 = x + y 2 2 0 1 0 1 L4: 2 2 L1 2 x3=ϕ(x1, x2) d = x3 + y 3 2 1 L2 L4 L3

  23. Another Example • VN can be extended to GVN • on dominator trees: • Do a (what order?) walk of the dominator tree; • Maintain a scoped table along the way (just as we did with the scope declarations of variables) • for each block B, do VN as before, for a successor S of B, modify the ϕarguments. L1: 2 0 1 a = x + y L2: L3: b = x + y x1 = 2 a1 = 3 3 3 2 0 1 4 4 L4: L1 5 3 0 x2=ϕ(x, x1) d = x2 + y 6 5 1 L2 L4 L3

More Related