10,660 research outputs found

    Loop Optimizations in C and C++ Compilers: An Overview

    Get PDF
    The evolution of computer hardware in the past decades has truly been remarkable. From scalar instruction execution through superscalar and vector to parallel, processors are able to reach astonishing speeds – if programmed accordingly. Now, writing programs that take all the hardware details into consideration for the sake of efficiency is extremely difficult and error-prone. Therefore we increasingly rely on compilers to do the heavy-lifting for us. A significant part of optimizations done by compilers are loop optimiza- tions. Loops are inherently expensive parts of a program in terms of run time, and it is important that they exploit superscalar and vector instructions. In this paper, we give an overview of the scientific literature on loop optimization technology, and summarize the status of current implementations in the most widely used C and C++ compilers in the industry

    Performance Evaulation of ISO C restrict on the Power Architecture

    Get PDF
    The C99 standard for the C programming language introduced the new type qualifier restrict which acts as a hint for the compiler and the programmer that the specified pointer is not aliased by any other pointer if the pointed object can be modified. By using restrict on pointers the compiler may, if implemented and allowed, optimize code even further. This thesis investigates how well the C compilers GCC, Clang and XL C implements optimizations based on restrict on the Power architecture. By running a modified Livermore benchmark consisting of different loops that are suitable for restrict based optimizations we show that all three compilers are capable of doing restrict based optimizations. Furthermore we investigate loops using a pipeline simulator in order to understand the performance characteristics of the optimizations. We show that the performance for each loop vary by compiler, some loops have their running time significantly reduced while others, somewhat surprisingly, actually have their run time increased. Finally we provide some general suggestions for programmers and compiler developers on how to best use restrict

    Liveness-Driven Random Program Generation

    Get PDF
    Randomly generated programs are popular for testing compilers and program analysis tools, with hundreds of bugs in real-world C compilers found by random testing. However, existing random program generators may generate large amounts of dead code (computations whose result is never used). This leaves relatively little code to exercise a target compiler's more complex optimizations. To address this shortcoming, we introduce liveness-driven random program generation. In this approach the random program is constructed bottom-up, guided by a simultaneous structural data-flow analysis to ensure that the generator never generates dead code. The algorithm is implemented as a plugin for the Frama-C framework. We evaluate it in comparison to Csmith, the standard random C program generator. Our tool generates programs that compile to more machine code with a more complex instruction mix.Comment: Pre-proceedings paper presented at the 27th International Symposium on Logic-Based Program Synthesis and Transformation (LOPSTR 2017), Namur, Belgium, 10-12 October 2017 (arXiv:1708.07854

    A Survey on Compiler Autotuning using Machine Learning

    Full text link
    Since the mid-1990s, researchers have been trying to use machine-learning based approaches to solve a number of different compiler optimization problems. These techniques primarily enhance the quality of the obtained results and, more importantly, make it feasible to tackle two main compiler optimization problems: optimization selection (choosing which optimizations to apply) and phase-ordering (choosing the order of applying optimizations). The compiler optimization space continues to grow due to the advancement of applications, increasing number of compiler optimizations, and new target architectures. Generic optimization passes in compilers cannot fully leverage newly introduced optimizations and, therefore, cannot keep up with the pace of increasing options. This survey summarizes and classifies the recent advances in using machine learning for the compiler optimization field, particularly on the two major problems of (1) selecting the best optimizations and (2) the phase-ordering of optimizations. The survey highlights the approaches taken so far, the obtained results, the fine-grain classification among different approaches and finally, the influential papers of the field.Comment: version 5.0 (updated on September 2018)- Preprint Version For our Accepted Journal @ ACM CSUR 2018 (42 pages) - This survey will be updated quarterly here (Send me your new published papers to be added in the subsequent version) History: Received November 2016; Revised August 2017; Revised February 2018; Accepted March 2018

    Building Efficient Query Engines in a High-Level Language

    Get PDF
    Abstraction without regret refers to the vision of using high-level programming languages for systems development without experiencing a negative impact on performance. A database system designed according to this vision offers both increased productivity and high performance, instead of sacrificing the former for the latter as is the case with existing, monolithic implementations that are hard to maintain and extend. In this article, we realize this vision in the domain of analytical query processing. We present LegoBase, a query engine written in the high-level language Scala. The key technique to regain efficiency is to apply generative programming: LegoBase performs source-to-source compilation and optimizes the entire query engine by converting the high-level Scala code to specialized, low-level C code. We show how generative programming allows to easily implement a wide spectrum of optimizations, such as introducing data partitioning or switching from a row to a column data layout, which are difficult to achieve with existing low-level query compilers that handle only queries. We demonstrate that sufficiently powerful abstractions are essential for dealing with the complexity of the optimization effort, shielding developers from compiler internals and decoupling individual optimizations from each other. We evaluate our approach with the TPC-H benchmark and show that: (a) With all optimizations enabled, LegoBase significantly outperforms a commercial database and an existing query compiler. (b) Programmers need to provide just a few hundred lines of high-level code for implementing the optimizations, instead of complicated low-level code that is required by existing query compilation approaches. (c) The compilation overhead is low compared to the overall execution time, thus making our approach usable in practice for compiling query engines

    Towards an Achievable Performance for the Loop Nests

    Full text link
    Numerous code optimization techniques, including loop nest optimizations, have been developed over the last four decades. Loop optimization techniques transform loop nests to improve the performance of the code on a target architecture, including exposing parallelism. Finding and evaluating an optimal, semantic-preserving sequence of transformations is a complex problem. The sequence is guided using heuristics and/or analytical models and there is no way of knowing how close it gets to optimal performance or if there is any headroom for improvement. This paper makes two contributions. First, it uses a comparative analysis of loop optimizations/transformations across multiple compilers to determine how much headroom may exist for each compiler. And second, it presents an approach to characterize the loop nests based on their hardware performance counter values and a Machine Learning approach that predicts which compiler will generate the fastest code for a loop nest. The prediction is made for both auto-vectorized, serial compilation and for auto-parallelization. The results show that the headroom for state-of-the-art compilers ranges from 1.10x to 1.42x for the serial code and from 1.30x to 1.71x for the auto-parallelized code. These results are based on the Machine Learning predictions.Comment: Accepted at the 31st International Workshop on Languages and Compilers for Parallel Computing (LCPC 2018
    • …
    corecore