Composing dataflow analyses and transformations

ABSTRACT

Dataflow analyses can have mutually beneficial interactions. Previous efforts to exploit these interactions have either (1) iteratively performed each individual analysis until no further improvements are discovered or (2) developed "super-analyses" that manually combine conceptually separate analyses. We have devised a new approach that allows analyses to be defined independently while still enabling them to be combined automatically and profitably. Our approach avoids the loss of precision associated with iterating individual analyses and the implementation difficulties of manually writing a super-analysis. The key to our approach is a novel method of implicit communication between the individual components of a super-analysis based on graph transformations. In this paper, we precisely define our approach; we demonstrate that it is sound and it terminates; finally we give experimental results showing that in practice (1) our framework produces results at least as precise as iterating the individual analyses while compiling at least 5 times faster, and (2) our framework achieves the same precision as a manually written super-analysis while incurring a compile-time overhead of less than 20%.

REFERENCES

• 1: A. Aiken and E. Wimmers. Solving systems of set constraints. In Proceedings of the 7'th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 329-340, Santa Cruz, CA, June 1992.
• 2: Martin Alt , Florian Martin, Generation of Efficient Interprocedural Analyzers with PAG, Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Static Analysis, p.33-50, September 25-27, 1995
• 3: Uwe Aßmann, How to Uniformly Specify Program Analysis and Transformation with Graph Rewrite Systems, Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Compiler Construction, p.121-135, April 24-26, 1996
• 4: Uwe Assmann, Graph rewrite systems for program optimization, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.22 n.4, p.583-637, July 2000 [doi>10.1145/363911.363914]
• 5: Craig Chambers. The Cecil language: Specification and rationale. Technical Report UW-CSE-93-03-05, Department of Computer Science and Engineering. University of Washington, March 1993. Revised, March 1997.
• 6: Craig Chambers, Jeffrey Dean, and David Grove. Frameworks for intra- and interprocedural data ow analysis. Technical Report UW-CSE-96-11-02, University of Washington, November 1996.
• 7: Craig Chambers , David Ungar, Interactive type analysis and extended message splitting; optimizing dynamically-typed object-oriented programs, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1990 conference on Programming language design and implementation, p.150-164, June 1990, White Plains, New York, United States
• 8: Jong-Deok Choi , Ron Cytron , Jeanne Ferrante, Automatic construction of sparse data flow evaluation graphs, Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.55-66, January 21-23, 1991, Orlando, Florida, United States [doi>10.1145/99583.99594]
• 9: Cliff Click , Keith D. Cooper, Combining analyses, combining optimizations, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.17 n.2, p.181-196, March 1995 [doi>10.1145/201059.201061]
• 10: Patrick Cousot , Radhia Cousot, Abstract interpretation: a unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints, Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.238-252, January 17-19, 1977, Los Angeles, California [doi>10.1145/512950.512973]
• 11: Patrick Cousot , Radhia Cousot, Systematic design of program analysis frameworks, Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.269-282, January 29-31, 1979, San Antonio, Texas [doi>10.1145/567752.567778]
• 12: R. Cytron , J. Ferrante , B. K. Rosen , M. N. Wegman , F. K. Zadeck, An efficient method of computing static single assignment form, Proceedings of the 16th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.25-35, January 11-13, 1989, Austin, Texas, United States [doi>10.1145/75277.75280]
• 13: Jeffrey Dean , Greg DeFouw , David Grove , Vassily Litvinov , Craig Chambers, Vortex: an optimizing compiler for object-oriented languages, Proceedings of the 11th ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applications, p.83-100, October 06-10, 1996, San Jose, California, United States
• 14: Dhananjay M. Dhamdhere , Barry K. Rosen , F. Kenneth Zadeck, How to analyze large programs efficiently and informatively, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, v.27 n.7, p.212-223, July 1992
• 15: Matthew B. Dwyer , Lori A. Clarke, A flexible architecture for building data flow analyzers, Proceedings of the 18th international conference on Software engineering, p.554-564, March 25-29, 1996, Berlin, Germany
• 16: Jeanne Ferrante , Karl J. Ottenstein , Joe D. Warren, The program dependence graph and its use in optimization, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.9 n.3, p.319-349, July 1987 [doi>10.1145/24039.24041]
• 17: Mary W. Hall , John M. Mellor-Crummey , Alan Carle , René G. Rodríguez, FIAT: A Framework for Interprocedural Analysis and Transfomation, Proceedings of the 6th International Workshop on Languages and Compilers for Parallel Computing, p.522-545, August 12-14, 1993
• 18: Nevin Heintze, Set-based analysis of ML programs, Proceedings of the 1994 ACM conference on LISP and functional programming, p.306-317, June 27-29, 1994, Orlando, Florida, United States
• 19: Laurie J. Hendren, Maryam Emami, Rakesh Ghiya, and Clark Verbrugge. A practical context-sensitive interprocedural analysis framework for c compilers. Technical Report ACAPS Technical Memo 72, McGill University School of Computer Science, July 1993.
• 20: Suresh Jagannathan , Stephen Weeks, A unified treatment of flow analysis in higher-order languages, Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.393-407, January 23-25, 1995, San Francisco, California, United States [doi>10.1145/199448.199536]
• 21: Richard Johnson , Keshav Pingali, Dependence-based program analysis, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1993 conference on Programming language design and implementation, p.78-89, June 21-25, 1993, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
• 22: Sorin Lerner, David Grove, and Craig Chambers. Composing data ow analyses and transformations. Technical Report UW-CSE-01-11-01, University of Washington, November 2001.
• 23: Stephen P. Masticola , Thomas J. Marlowe , Barbara G. Ryder, Lattice frameworks for multisource and bidirectional data flow problems, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.17 n.5, p.777-803, Sept. 1995 [doi>10.1145/213978.213989]
• 24: Greg Nelson , Derek C. Oppen, A simplifier based on efficient decision algorithms, Proceedings of the 5th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.141-150, January 23-25, 1978, Tucson, Arizona [doi>10.1145/512760.512775]
• 25: Anthony Pioli and Michael Hind. Combining interprocedural pointer analysis and conditional constant propagation. Technical Report 21532, IBM T.J. Watson Center, 1999.
• 26: Vugranam C. Sreedhar , Guang R. Gao , Yong-Fong Lee, A new framework for exhaustive and incremental data flow analysis using DJ graphs, Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 1996 conference on Programming language design and implementation, p.278-290, May 21-24, 1996, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
• 27: Steven W. K. Tjiang , John L. Hennessy, Sharlit—a tool for building optimizers, ACM SIGPLAN Notices, v.27 n.7, p.82-93, July 1992
• 28: G. A. Venkatesh , Charles N. Fischer, SPARE: A Development Environment for Program Analysis Algorithms, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering, v.18 n.4, p.304-318, April 1992 [doi>10.1109/32.129219]
• 29: Mark N. Wegman , F. Kenneth Zadeck, Constant propagation with conditional branches, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.13 n.2, p.181-210, April 1991 [doi>10.1145/103135.103136]
• 30: Mark N. Wegman , Frank Kenneth Zadeck, Constant propagation with conditional branches, Proceedings of the 12th ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.291-299, January 14-16, 1985, New Orleans, Louisiana, United States [doi>10.1145/318593.318659]
• 31: Daniel Weise , Roger F. Crew , Michael Ernst , Bjarne Steensgaard, Value dependence graphs: representation without taxation, Proceedings of the 21st ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.297-310, January 16-19, 1994, Portland, Oregon, United States [doi>10.1145/174675.177907]
• 32: D. Whitfield , M. L. Soffa, An approach to ordering optimizing transformations, Proceedings of the second ACM SIGPLAN symposium on Principles & practice of parallel programming, p.137-146, March 14-16, 1990, Seattle, Washington, United States
• 33: Deborah L. Whitfield , Mary Lou Soffa, An approach for exploring code improving transformations, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS), v.19 n.6, p.1053-1084, Nov. 1997 [doi>10.1145/267959.267960]
• 34: Kwangkeun Yi , Williams Ludwell Harrison, III, Automatic generation and management of interprocedural program analyses, Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT symposium on Principles of programming languages, p.246-259, March 1993, Charleston, South Carolina, United States [doi>10.1145/158511.158642]