C++: Protect the value numbering library from instructions with multiple enclosing functions #20369
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We hit a performance problem on https://github.com/openvinotoolkit/oneDNN in the 2.23.0 release, and after looking long and hard at the resulting tuple count explosion in the
IRGuards
library I narrowed the problem down to a fewInitializeParameter
instructions with more than one enclosing IR functions.Since each value number has an
IRFunction
column this meant that theseInitializeParameter
instructions mapped to many many value numbers which meant that certain joins inIRGuard
which were expected to have no fan-out caused a large explosion.Ideally, we should have no instruction with multiple enclosing
IRFunction
s. However, to mitigate this problem going forward this PR ensures that instructions with multipleIRFunction
s are assigned a unique value number.Commit-by-commit review recommended.