Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2305.13241

Whose baseline compiler is it anyway?

Abstract

Compilers face an intrinsic tradeoff between compilation speed and code quality. The tradeoff is particularly stark in a dynamic setting where JIT compilation time contributes to application runtime. Many systems now employ multiple compilation tiers, where one tier offers fast compile speed while another has much slower compile speed but produces higher quality code. With proper heuristics on when to use each, the overall performance is better than using either compiler in isolation. At the introduction of WebAssembly into the Web platform in 2017, most engines employed optimizing compilers and pre-compiled entire modules before execution. Yet since that time, all Web engines have introduced new "baseline" compiler tiers for Wasm to improve startup time. Further, many new non-web engines have appeared, some of which also employ simple compilers. In this paper, we demystify single-pass compilers for Wasm, explaining their internal algorithms and tradeoffs, as well as providing a detailed empirical study of those employed in production. We show the design of a new single-pass compiler for a research Wasm engine that integrates with an in-place interpreter and host garbage collector using value tags, while also supporting flexible instrumentation. In experiments, we measure the effectiveness of optimizations targeting value tags and find, somewhat surprisingly, that the runtime overhead can be reduced to near zero. We also assess the relative compile speed and execution time of six baseline compilers and place these baseline compilers in a two-dimensional tradeoff space with other execution tiers for Wasm.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Ben L. Titzer. 2023-11-05. Whose baseline compiler is it anyway?. https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.13241

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Expressive power of one-shot control operators and coroutines

Control operators, such as exceptions and effect handlers, provide a means of representing computational effects in programs abstractly and modularly. While most theoretical studies have focused on multi-shot control operators, one-shot control operators---which restrict the use of captured continuations to at most once---are gaining attention for their balance between expressiveness and efficiency. This study aims to fill the gap. We present a mathematically rigorous comparison of the expressive power among one-shot control operators, including effect handlers, delimited continuations, and even asymmetric coroutines. Following previous studies on multi-shot control operators, we adopt Felleisen's macro-expressiveness as our measure of expressiveness. We verify the folklore that one-shot effect handlers and one-shot delimited-control operators can be macro-expressed by asymmetric coroutines, but not vice versa. We explain why a previous informal argument fails, and how to revise it to make a valid macro-translation.

cs.PL

Authorization Revocation for Long-Running AI Agents: Root-Scoped Quiescence under Delegation and Asynchronous Execution

Long-running AI agents outlive initiating processes through credentials, delegated tasks, queues, callbacks, reservations, and provider-side operations. Cancellation, process exit, and credential revocation neither close every pre-cut carrier nor distinguish independently authorized shared work. We define root-scoped authorization quiescence: for each manifested sink, a certificate accounts for every cut-relevant acceptance under the retired root-epoch atom that precedes its local fence and excludes protected acceptance under that atom after the fence, while permitting exact rebind to a current, independently sufficient support. The root-scoped quiescence protocol linearizes a root cut, fences old-root expansion and protected sinks, represents alternative and conjunctive authority as antichains of minimal sufficient root sets, and composes provider-frontier certificates into a cutset over registered old-root paths. Exact channel-token accounting reconciles transfers; missing or conflicting evidence remains indeterminate. Under stated assumptions, we prove post-cut issuer non-expansion, support-sound projection, compositional soundness under exact channel conservation, independent-support preservation, merge-order independence, and crash/replay stability. A provider-free late-effect test suite matches 17/17 registered outcomes. Two cancellation-only and one cut-only execution accept the same class of already scheduled late effect; two cut-plus-fence executions, one restart, and one stale-process execution reject it. A separately implemented checker verifies 17/17 traces and rejects 44/44 consistently rehashed semantic regressions. The certificate establishes root-relative authorization quiescence within its bound manifest and configuration, not global idleness, rollback, or business completion.

cs.PL

Soda: An Object-Oriented Functional Language for Specifying Human-Centered Problems

We present Soda (Symbolic Objective Descriptive Analysis), a language that helps to treat qualities and quantities in a natural way and greatly simplifies the task of checking correctness. We present key properties for the language motivated by the design of a descriptive language to encode complex requirements on computer systems, and we explain how these key properties must be addressed to model these requirements with simple definitions. We give an overview of a tool that helps to describe problems in an easy way, which we consider more transparent and less error-prone.

cs.PL