[DomTree] Avoid duplicate hash lookups in runDFS() (NFCI) #96460
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
runDFS() currently performs three hash table lookups. One in the main loop, one when checking whether a successor has already been visited and another when adding parent and reverse children to the successor. We can avoid the two additional lookups by making the parent number part of the stack, and then making the parent / reverse children update part of the main loop. The main loop already has a check for already visited nodes, so we don't have to check this in advance -- we can simply push the node to the worklist and skip it later.
|
@llvm/pr-subscribers-llvm-support Author: Nikita Popov (nikic) ChangesrunDFS() currently performs three hash table lookups. One in the main loop, one when checking whether a successor has already been visited and another when adding parent and reverse children to the successor. We can avoid the two additional lookups by making the parent number part of the stack, and then making the parent / reverse children update part of the main loop. The main loop already has a check for already visited nodes, so we don't have to check this in advance -- we can simply push the node to the worklist and skip it later. This results in a minor compile-time improvement: http://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=c43d5f540fd43409e7997c9fec97a1d415855b7c&to=1844fc47329a2905bf73b7b86964e8a31fa3b758&stat=instructions:u Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/96460.diff 1 Files Affected:
diff --git a/llvm/include/llvm/Support/GenericDomTreeConstruction.h b/llvm/include/llvm/Support/GenericDomTreeConstruction.h
index 401cc4eb0ec1b..57cbe993d8739 100644
--- a/llvm/include/llvm/Support/GenericDomTreeConstruction.h
+++ b/llvm/include/llvm/Support/GenericDomTreeConstruction.h
@@ -180,15 +180,17 @@ struct SemiNCAInfo {
unsigned AttachToNum,
const NodeOrderMap *SuccOrder = nullptr) {
assert(V);
- SmallVector<NodePtr, 64> WorkList = {V};
+ SmallVector<std::pair<NodePtr, unsigned>, 64> WorkList = {{V, AttachToNum}};
NodeToInfo[V].Parent = AttachToNum;
while (!WorkList.empty()) {
- const NodePtr BB = WorkList.pop_back_val();
+ const auto [BB, ParentNum] = WorkList.pop_back_val();
auto &BBInfo = NodeToInfo[BB];
+ BBInfo.ReverseChildren.push_back(ParentNum);
// Visited nodes always have positive DFS numbers.
if (BBInfo.DFSNum != 0) continue;
+ BBInfo.Parent = ParentNum;
BBInfo.DFSNum = BBInfo.Semi = BBInfo.Label = ++LastNum;
NumToNode.push_back(BB);
@@ -201,22 +203,9 @@ struct SemiNCAInfo {
});
for (const NodePtr Succ : Successors) {
- const auto SIT = NodeToInfo.find(Succ);
- // Don't visit nodes more than once but remember to collect
- // ReverseChildren.
- if (SIT != NodeToInfo.end() && SIT->second.DFSNum != 0) {
- if (Succ != BB) SIT->second.ReverseChildren.push_back(LastNum);
- continue;
- }
-
if (!Condition(BB, Succ)) continue;
- // It's fine to add Succ to the map, because we know that it will be
- // visited later.
- auto &SuccInfo = NodeToInfo[Succ];
- WorkList.push_back(Succ);
- SuccInfo.Parent = LastNum;
- SuccInfo.ReverseChildren.push_back(LastNum);
+ WorkList.push_back({Succ, LastNum});
}
}
|
kuhar
reviewed
Jun 24, 2024
| @@ -180,15 +180,17 @@ struct SemiNCAInfo { | |||
| unsigned AttachToNum, | |||
| const NodeOrderMap *SuccOrder = nullptr) { | |||
| assert(V); | |||
| SmallVector<NodePtr, 64> WorkList = {V}; | |||
| SmallVector<std::pair<NodePtr, unsigned>, 64> WorkList = {{V, AttachToNum}}; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This looks like a pretty large stack allocation (16B * 64 => 1kB?). Is this what we want?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's on the bigger side, but as runDFS is essentially a leaf function, I don't think it's a problem.
kuhar
approved these changes
Jun 24, 2024
|
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/101/builds/644 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference: |
|
LLVM Buildbot has detected a new failure on builder Full details are available at: https://lab.llvm.org/buildbot/#/builders/139/builds/441 Here is the relevant piece of the build log for the reference: |
AlexisPerry
pushed a commit
to llvm-project-tlp/llvm-project
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 9, 2024
runDFS() currently performs three hash table lookups. One in the main loop, one when checking whether a successor has already been visited and another when adding parent and reverse children to the successor. We can avoid the two additional lookups by making the parent number part of the stack, and then making the parent / reverse children update part of the main loop. The main loop already has a check for already visited nodes, so we don't have to check this in advance -- we can simply push the node to the worklist and skip it later.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
runDFS() currently performs three hash table lookups. One in the main loop, one when checking whether a successor has already been visited and another when adding parent and reverse children to the successor.
We can avoid the two additional lookups by making the parent number part of the stack, and then making the parent / reverse children update part of the main loop.
The main loop already has a check for already visited nodes, so we don't have to check this in advance -- we can simply push the node to the worklist and skip it later.
This results in a minor compile-time improvement: http://llvm-compile-time-tracker.com/compare.php?from=c43d5f540fd43409e7997c9fec97a1d415855b7c&to=1844fc47329a2905bf73b7b86964e8a31fa3b758&stat=instructions:u