RE: Optimizer discussion

Hey, I always love having input. When you said it was vicious I was expecting more, in fact I agree completely with you on a lot of things :-) Anyway, I'm not really sure how much detail you want me to go into (or how much detail people on internals really want me to get into). So, I'll keep it brief for now and can expand on anything. Why not start off with the big stuff, dataflow. I personally believe that working out good data flow for PHP is key to getting good optimizations. But you are right, its a very tricky thing to do and in some cases impossible. Ultimately, I would like to move a lot of the optimizer work more into this direction and use the data flow to build a basic platform for code analysis on which optimizations can be done. For now though, pecl/optimizer is "dumb" about data types :-) The reimplementations of some engine code is messy and work should probably be done to try to remove this where possible. Also, I might be mistaken but the is_numeric_result stuff is partly left over from Turck MMCache which to my understanding this version of pecl/optimizer was based off of. Some of the stuff I was doing with building a function table (for optimizable and some non optimizable functions) was to try and get rid of rudimentary data type detection like this. Actually folding in values from function calls is happening over in the optimize_fcr.c file. I 100% agree with you on the file system functions. They were in there when I started working on the optimizer and I havent really paid much attention to them. The latest CVS version of pecl/optimizer has them at least removed from being candidates for optimization (the code to actually optimize is still there). I'm not sure which optimization you are talking about with the GLOBALS stuff but what your saying makes sense. (Its been awhile since I've looked at the code base myself, I'm just getting back to working on it) As far as my future plans for pecl/optimizer I should really gather up all my ideas and stuff in the next week or so that you or anyone else who is interested can give feedback. At the moment, I'm working on getting the current version to a stable state. I'm also still trying to gauge demand for pecl/optimizer to maybe help figure out direction for the project. (or if there is really any real interest/or use). ________________________________________ From: Paul Biggar [paul.biggar@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 4:20 PM To: Graham Kelly Cc: PHP Internals; Brian Shire Subject: Optimizer discussion Graham and I are having a brief chat about the work he's going to do on the PECL optimizer. People have asked me to do this on-list (they may have meant the PECL list, but optimizations on PHP seem more relevant here), so here goes. Hi Graham, So the general gist of what I have to say is that dataflow optimizations on PHP are very difficult, and nearly impossible at the function-local level. Loop-invariant hoisting and other redundant expression computation liekwise. If you're planning on working on them, we can go into more detail. I guess the biggest thing is that I'm wondering what your plans are for the PECL optimizer? I've spent about 2 years working on the phc optimizer, (and a bit longer on relevant things) so I hope that my advice will be relevant. I've taken a look through the optimizer a few times over the last while, (and even stolen some ideas from it). Here are my comments on the current code: - There is lots of code which reimplements parts of the engine, for example: ini_bool_decode, optimizer_acosh and friends, optimize_md5, optimize_crc32, optimize_sha1, optimize_class_exists and friends (to a lesser extent). There are also lots of constant foldings, like casts and "0 == false" (etc) in optimize_code_block. I don't understand why there is logic in the code for that, rather than simply executing the opcodes, or constructing an eval and executing that. - is_numeric_result: there has been great effort to figure out numeric results from pure functions, when it seems straightforward to optimizer the results straight in. Maybe that is being done elsewhere? If so, there may need to be some care taken to ensure that all optimizations terminate. - File system functions are very iffy. I would be surprised if people have content that reads from files repeatedly, but where the files do not change, and who are willing to use that flag. - Most of the identity optimizations arent safe. $x + 0 !== $x, unfortunately, due to integer coercions (parallels exist for other types/operators) - I think I saw an optimizations converting ("45" + $x) into (45+$x) - that's a great idea, which I will steal. - How does runkit (and other weird extensions) affect optimizations on constants, class_exists, etc? - The optimization "unsafe: optimize out isset()/empty() ops on GLOBALS['foo'] into $foo " is not safe, as GLOBALS['foo'] may not be the same variable as $foo ($GLOBALS may be unset, and indeed, there may be good reasons to do so). I'm also wondering what the optimizations are on fcall? I couldn't make it out. That's quite a lot, but its everything I have on the current PECL optimizer :) Thanks, Paul -- Paul Biggar paul.biggar@gmail.com