BE-232: HashQL: Implement dataflow analysis framework with liveness analysis

[indietyp]

🌟 What is the purpose of this PR?

Add a generic dataflow analysis framework to MIR with a liveness analysis implementation

🔍 What does this change?

• Introduces a new dataflow analysis framework in mir/src/pass/analysis/dataflow/
• Implements a lattice-based approach with support for both forward and backward analyses
• Adds a liveness analysis implementation as the first client of the framework
• Refactors the Pass trait into separate TransformPass and AnalysisPass traits
• Adds new_filled method to MixedBitSet to support creating filled bitsets
• Adds SwitchIntValue enum to represent switch terminator branch values
• Enables the iter_intersperse feature for formatting output

Pre-Merge Checklist 🚀

🚢 Has this modified a publishable library?

This PR:

• does not modify any publishable blocks or libraries, or modifications do not need publishing

📜 Does this require a change to the docs?

The changes in this PR:

• are internal and do not require a docs change

🕸️ Does this require a change to the Turbo Graph?

The changes in this PR:

• do not affect the execution graph

🛡 What tests cover this?

• Added comprehensive test suite for the liveness analysis
• Added algebraic law verification tests for lattice implementations

[indietyp]

Warning

This pull request is not mergeable via GitHub because a downstack PR is open. Once all requirements are satisfied, merge this PR as a stack on Graphite.
Learn more

• BE-232: HashQL: Implement dataflow analysis framework with liveness analysis #8168 👈 (View in Graphite)
• BE-209: HashQL: Implement data dependency analysis for MIR #8158
• main

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 79.09270% with 212 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 58.17%. Comparing base (aa64e0a) to head (e0837a2).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...hashql/mir/src/pass/analysis/dataflow/framework.rs	44.85%	176 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...hql/mir/src/pass/analysis/dataflow/lattice/laws.rs	90.37%	25 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/core/src/id/bit_vec/mod.rs	0.00%	5 Missing ⚠️
...hql/mir/src/pass/analysis/dataflow/liveness/mod.rs	94.59%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
libs/@local/hashql/mir/src/pass/mod.rs	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@                                         Coverage Diff                                         @@
##           bm/be-209-hashql-implement-dataflow-tracking-between-statements    #8168      +/-   ##
===================================================================================================
+ Coverage                                                            57.98%   58.17%   +0.19%     
===================================================================================================
  Files                                                                 1169     1175       +6     
  Lines                                                               109681   110687    +1006     
  Branches                                                              4985     4994       +9     
===================================================================================================
+ Hits                                                                 63603    64397     +794     
- Misses                                                               45329    45538     +209     
- Partials                                                               749      752       +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
rust.hashql-compiletest	49.36% <ø> (ø)
rust.hashql-mir	83.93% <79.48%> (-0.85%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

Benchmark results

@rust/hash-graph-benches – Integrations

policy_resolution_large

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2002	$$28.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 264 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.782 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.25 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.759 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1001	$$12.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 105 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.161 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 3314	$$42.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 273 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.771 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$14.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 65.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.619 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 1526	$$24.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 169 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.134 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 2078	$$27.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 173 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-39.151 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.65 \mathrm{ms} \pm 22.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-82.244 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 1033	$$14.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 95.9 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-51.845 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_medium

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 102	$$3.67 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.414 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.82 \mathrm{ms} \pm 13.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.217 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 51	$$3.21 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.655 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 269	$$5.08 \mathrm{ms} \pm 24.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.586 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.40 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.957 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 107	$$3.96 \mathrm{ms} \pm 19.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.406 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 133	$$4.38 \mathrm{ms} \pm 21.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.066 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$3.29 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.422 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 63	$$3.98 \mathrm{ms} \pm 27.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.233 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_none

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 2	$$2.50 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.09 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.48 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.06 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 1	$$2.55 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.6 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 8	$$2.77 \mathrm{ms} \pm 18.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.61 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.62 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}4.71 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 3	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

policy_resolution_small

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: high, policies: 52	$$2.92 \mathrm{ms} \pm 12.1 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.43 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.57 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: empty, selectivity: medium, policies: 25	$$2.76 \mathrm{ms} \pm 9.20 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.85 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: high, policies: 94	$$3.24 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}5.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.81 \mathrm{ms} \pm 10.3 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.99 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: seeded, selectivity: medium, policies: 26	$$3.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 14.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.12 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: high, policies: 66	$$3.27 \mathrm{ms} \pm 16.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.87 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: low, policies: 1	$$2.79 \mathrm{ms} \pm 11.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.17 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
resolve_policies_for_actor	user: system, selectivity: medium, policies: 29	$$3.05 \mathrm{ms} \pm 15.4 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}7.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_complete

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id;one_depth	1 entities	$$38.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 156 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.776 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	10 entities	$$85.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 533 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.41 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	25 entities	$$42.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 191 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	5 entities	$$45.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 256 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.72 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;one_depth	50 entities	$$53.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 279 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.28 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	1 entities	$$40.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 169 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.32 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	10 entities	$$498 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.06 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{gray}-0.265 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	25 entities	$$99.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 393 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.313 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	5 entities	$$83.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 346 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.624 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;two_depth	50 entities	$$291 \mathrm{ms} \pm 577 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.114 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	1 entities	$$14.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 78.0 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.50 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	10 entities	$$15.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 75.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.95 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	25 entities	$$15.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 88.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.60 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	5 entities	$$14.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 55.2 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.828 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id;zero_depth	50 entities	$$18.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 104 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.959 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

read_scaling_linkless

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	1 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 72.7 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.27 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10 entities	$$14.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 91.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.591 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	100 entities	$$15.1 \mathrm{ms} \pm 86.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}3.40 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	1000 entities	$$15.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 69.8 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.42 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	10000 entities	$$22.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 148 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.11 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/block/v/1	$$29.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 313 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.90 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/book/v/1	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 299 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}2.94 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/building/v/1	$$29.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 322 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.252 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/organization/v/1	$$30.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 279 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.650 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/page/v/2	$$28.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 247 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-4.788 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/person/v/1	$$31.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 340 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.62 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/playlist/v/1	$$30.2 \mathrm{ms} \pm 274 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.967 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/song/v/1	$$29.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 273 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.819 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
entity_by_id	entity type ID: https://blockprotocol.org/@alice/types/entity-type/uk-address/v/1	$$30.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 309 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.59 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_entity_type

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
get_entity_type_by_id	Account ID: bf5a9ef5-dc3b-43cf-a291-6210c0321eba	$$8.89 \mathrm{ms} \pm 39.5 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.565 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph

representative_read_multiple_entities

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$56.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 318 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.555 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$110 \mathrm{ms} \pm 407 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.31 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$62.3 \mathrm{ms} \pm 313 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.003 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$70.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 358 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-1.498 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$80.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 313 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}-0.085 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
entity_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$86.9 \mathrm{ms} \pm 348 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.392 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=0	0	$$52.6 \mathrm{ms} \pm 275 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}1.13 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=255	1,resolve_depths=inherit:1;values:255;properties:255;links:127;link_dests:126;type:true	$$81.4 \mathrm{ms} \pm 392 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.459 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:0;link_dests:0;type:false	$$59.0 \mathrm{ms} \pm 350 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.463 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:0;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$67.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 284 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.652 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:0;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$69.8 \mathrm{ms} \pm 375 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.631 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$
link_by_source_by_property	traversal_paths=2	1,resolve_depths=inherit:0;values:2;properties:2;links:1;link_dests:0;type:true	$$70.5 \mathrm{ms} \pm 458 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{gray}0.498 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$

scenarios

Function	Value	Mean	Flame graphs
full_test	query-limited	$$140 \mathrm{ms} \pm 628 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}8.65 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
full_test	query-unlimited	$$136 \mathrm{ms} \pm 549 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{red}6.55 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-limited	$$41.7 \mathrm{ms} \pm 189 \mathrm{μs}\left({\color{lightgreen}-59.227 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph
linked_queries	query-unlimited	$$580 \mathrm{ms} \pm 1.00 \mathrm{ms}\left({\color{lightgreen}-8.405 \mathrm{\%}}\right) $$	Flame Graph