[CakeML-dev] Let's remove max_app

Tue Mar 7 22:15:09 UTC 2017

Here're the numbers with max_app = 10 on both branches for btree and fib:

--- master ---

btree
Compile to livesets
runtime: 6m39s,    gctime: 28.0s,     systime: 2.7s.
Axioms: 0, Defs: 0, Disk: 0, Orcl: 0, Prims: 709909286; Total: 709909286

607 oracles

Repeat compilation with oracle
runtime: 29m39s,    gctime: 2m13s,     systime: 10.5s.
Axioms: 0, Defs: 0, Disk: 0, Orcl: 0, Prims: 3239510671; Total: 3239510671

fib
Compile to livesets
runtime: 6m36s,    gctime: 26.1s,     systime: 2.7s.
Axioms: 0, Defs: 0, Disk: 0, Orcl: 0, Prims: 704732789; Total: 704732789

597 oracles

Repeat compilation with oracle
runtime: 25m19s,    gctime: 1m01s,     systime: 5.5s.
Axioms: 0, Defs: 0, Disk: 0, Orcl: 0, Prims: 2618410506; Total: 2618410506

--- clos_stubs ---

btree
Compile to livesets
runtime: 4m01s,    gctime: 6.1s,     systime: 0.55600s.
Axioms: 0, Defs: 0, Disk: 0, Orcl: 0, Prims: 446369571; Total: 446369571

551 oracles

Repeat compilation with oracle
runtime: 19m24s,    gctime: 1m52s,     systime: 9.7s.
Axioms: 0, Defs: 0, Disk: 0, Orcl: 0, Prims: 2070001412; Total: 2070001412

fib
Compile to livesets
runtime: 3m58s,    gctime: 6.3s,     systime: 0.64800s.
Axioms: 0, Defs: 0, Disk: 0, Orcl: 0, Prims: 441178076; Total: 441178076

541 oracles

Repeat compilation with oracle
runtime: 16m29s,    gctime: 1m33s,     systime: 7.8s.
Axioms: 0, Defs: 0, Disk: 0, Orcl: 0, Prims: 1588238417; Total: 1588238417

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 11:31 AM, Yong Kiam <tanyongkiam at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'll try and leave two of the benchmarks with max_app set to 10 before I
> go to lectures (still rebuilding on master).
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Magnus Myreen <magnus.myreen at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> What are we measuring? I'm keen to know how high max_app can be. I
>> suspect we need it to be 10 in order to avoid generating bad applications
>> when compiling the compiler. -- Magnus
>>
>> On Tue, 7 Mar 2017 at 16:28, Scott Owens <S.A.Owens at kent.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Hold off for now, I just thought of another easy improvement.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>> > On 2017/03/07, at 15:12, Yong Kiam <tanyongkiam at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I can get you a before/after test on master and clos_stub on one of
>>> the benchmarks compiled in the logic.
>>> >
>>> > (will take awhile though)
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Scott Owens <S.A.Owens at kent.ac.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>> > I should clarify that this is on the clos_stub branch, which I haven’t
>>> merged back to master.
>>> >
>>> > Scott
>>> >
>>> > > On 2017/03/07, at 15:00, Scott Owens <S.A.Owens at kent.ac.uk> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > I’ve just finished the first improvement on reducing the number of
>>> stubs. I’d like to see where we are before trying to get further
>>> improvements. Can you re-try this, or even better, tell me what you were
>>> doing to get these numbers. Can we get anything meaningful without running
>>> the bootstrap (and the attendant 2 day wait)?
>>> > >
>>> > > Scott
>>> > >
>>> > >> On 2017/03/05, at 08:21, Magnus Myreen <magnus.myreen at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Hi all,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> We should get rid of max_app. Reasons:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> 2. The current compilation strategy produces too much stub code in
>>> > >>   clos_to_bvl.  If we really must have max_app (I argue below that
>>> > >>   we don't), then it should be something like 10 or 15. With the
>>> > >>   current compilation strategy, the binary produced for max_app=9 is
>>> > >>   176 kb larger than the binary for max_app=3. I wanted to try
>>> > >>   compiling with max_app=10, but that was taking more than 5
>>> > >>   minutes. Compiling with max_app=3 takes 7 seconds for me. I
>>> > >>   believe the slow down in compilation speed with differing max_app
>>> > >>   values is caused by the rapid increase in code size (number of
>>> > >>   stubs in clos_to_bvl) as max_app gets larger. My measurements
>>> > >>   are below while compiling factorial (and the basis library):
>>> > >>
>>> > >>     max_app=1:  10.810s  (* very little room for opts in basis *)
>>> > >>     max_app=2:  8.724s
>>> > >>     max_app=3:  7.872s  (* allows optimisations in basis code *)
>>> > >>     max_app=4:  8.935s
>>> > >>     max_app=5:  11.608s
>>> > >>     max_app=6:  21.771s
>>> > >>     max_app=7:  42.932s
>>> > >>     max_app=8:  1m24.872s
>>> > >>     max_app=9:  3m9.745s
>>> > >
>>> > > _______________________________________________
>>> > > Developers mailing list
>>> > > Developers at cakeml.org
>>> > > https://lists.cakeml.org/listinfo/developers
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Developers mailing list
>>> > Developers at cakeml.org
>>> > https://lists.cakeml.org/listinfo/developers
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.cakeml.org/pipermail/developers/attachments/20170307/e392fb81/attachment-0001.html>