Sorry for the delayed response.  Clearly this is not my "day" job.  :-)

Responses are inline.

Egor Pasko wrote:
On the 0x4F2 day of Apache Harmony Naveen Neelakantam wrote:
Would someone who understands the ABCD pass be willing to check my patch?

Egor if you still follow the list, could you please take a look?

Naveen, again thanks for the great work!

though I have some concerns about your patch:

1. changes in the solver are very unwanted because we want to make the
   solver as readable as possible (given that the concept is really
   complicated). Once we want equivalent Pi operands to behave like a
   single Pi operand, we should better link them together in the
   inequality graph (zero-edges, both higher and lower graphs). The
   solver goes through zero chains just fine.
I agree with the spirit of your comment, however in this case your suggestion is infeasible. There are two alternatives as I see it, which are dictated by the specifics of the algorithm. Either: a) The upper bound and lower bound problems are solved using separate e-SSA graphs, or b) The solver is modified to adopt the notion of pi-equivalence when checking for termination conditions (and _only_ when checking for termination conditions).

As a thought experiment, consider the implications of allowing zero edges between pi-renamed variables. It would essentially convey constraints granted onto pi-renamed variables upon their sources. This would make it possible for sources to appear constrained by inequalities that do _not_ dominate them. This is clearly incorrect.

In my opinion something must be done here, or ABCD should simply be disabled as it is otherwise crippled.

Clearly this is a complicated problem, and I welcome argument. :-)
2. "hvn,simplify,dce,uce,memopt,dce,uce" -- hmm.. this is big change,
   may affect a lot. Does anybody run benchmarks these days to ensure
   we do not affect performance with this?
Can someone please comment on this? I too am very concerned about the effect this might have on compilation speed.
3. "memopt" contains "hvn", is there really a reason to run it twice?
Probably not.

I will try removing hvn from the mix and see what happens. Thanks for the heads up
Thanks,
Naveen

Naveen Neelakantam (JIRA) wrote:
[drlvm][jit][abcd] classic abcd pass fixes
------------------------------------------

                 Key: HARMONY-6007
                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6007
             Project: Harmony
          Issue Type: Bug
         Environment: RHEL4, 32-bit x86, gcc 4.1.2
            Reporter: Naveen Neelakantam


The ABCD pass has effectively been crippled by changes that have been made to 
DRLVM over the past year (I haven't been able to narrow down when the change 
happened).

The good news is that with two simple fixes, ABCD works again.  The attached 
patch adds the necessary fixes.

To see the problem however you can try running the bi-directional bubble sort 
from HARMONY-1564.  It is well-known that ABCD should be able to eliminate all 
the bounds checks from the sort algorithm.  However, if you run drlvm without 
this patch, none of the bounds checks are eliminated.  You can examine the logs 
by doing the following:

java -XX:jit.p.filter=BidirectionalBubbleSort.sort -XX:jit.p.arg.log=ct,irdump 
-Xem:server_static BidirectionalBubbleSort

After applying the patch, all the bounds checks will once again be eliminated.  
There were two separate problems to blame, which this patch addresses:
1) Harmony now inserts multiple "arraylen" operations when translating from bytecode, even if the 
operation is redundant (because it post-dominates an earlier "arraylen" operation for the same 
array).  This redundancy must be eliminated before running ABCD otherwise the inequality graph that ABCD 
generates for its proofs will have unnecessary discontinuity.  Thankfully, solving the problem is as simple 
as running the following passes before ABCD: "hvn,simplify,dce,uce,memopt,dce,uce".
2) Our implementation of ABCD includes a novel design by Egor Pasko where both 
the upper-bound and lower-bound problems can be solved using the same 
inequality graph.  In addition the implementation adds more constraints to the 
graph than the original ABCD authors specified.  Both improvements are correct, 
except that they can prevent the ABCD solver from finding valid solutions 
because pi-renamed variables appear to be different.  The patch modifies the 
solver so that it treats pi-renamed variables as equivalent when checking for 
termination conditions.

I've verified that HARMONY-2141, HARMONY-2144, and HARMONY-2147 still pass with 
these changes.




Reply via email to