2022-10-28 01:22:58 +00:00
|
|
|
# Intermediate Representation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As Tint has grown the number of transforms on the AST has grown. This
|
|
|
|
growth has lead to several issues:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Transforms rebuild the AST and SEM which causes slowness
|
|
|
|
1. Transforming in AST can be difficult as the AST is hard to work with
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In order to address these goals, an IR is being introduced into Tint.
|
|
|
|
The IR is mutable, it holds the needed state in order to be transformed.
|
|
|
|
The IR is also translatable back into AST. It will be possible to
|
|
|
|
generate an AST, convert to IR, transform, and then rebuild a new AST.
|
|
|
|
This round-trip ability provides a few features:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Easy to integrate into current system by replacing AST transforms
|
|
|
|
piecemeal
|
|
|
|
1. Easier to test as the resulting AST can be emitted as WGSL and
|
|
|
|
compared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The IR helps with the complexity of the AST transforms by limiting the
|
|
|
|
representations seen in the IR form. For example, instead of `for`,
|
|
|
|
`while` and `loop` constructs there is a single `loop` construct.
|
2023-01-24 14:59:43 +00:00
|
|
|
`alias` and `const_assert` nodes are not emitted into IR. Dead code is
|
2022-10-28 01:22:58 +00:00
|
|
|
eliminated during the IR construction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the IR can convert into AST, we could potentially simplify the
|
|
|
|
SPIRV-Reader by generating IR directly. The IR is closer to what SPIR-V
|
|
|
|
looks like, so maybe a simpler transform.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Design
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The IR breaks down into two fundamental pieces, the control flow and the
|
|
|
|
expression lists. While these can be thought of as separate pieces they
|
|
|
|
are linked in that the control flow blocks contain the expression lists.
|
|
|
|
A control flow block may use the result of an expression as the
|
|
|
|
condition.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The IR works together with the AST/SEM. There is an underlying
|
|
|
|
assumption that the source `Program` will live as long as the IR. The IR
|
|
|
|
holds pointers to data from the `Program`. This includes things like SEM
|
|
|
|
types, variables, statements, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transforming from AST to IR and back to AST is a lossy operation.
|
|
|
|
The resulting AST when converting back will not be the same as the
|
|
|
|
AST being provided. (e.g. all `for`, `while` and `loop` constructs coming
|
|
|
|
in will become `while` loops going out). This is intentional as it
|
|
|
|
greatly simplifies the number of things to consider in the IR. For
|
|
|
|
instance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* No `alias` nodes
|
2023-01-24 14:59:43 +00:00
|
|
|
* No `const_assert` nodes
|
2022-10-28 01:22:58 +00:00
|
|
|
* All loops become `while` loops
|
|
|
|
* `if` statements may all become `if/else`
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Code Structure
|
|
|
|
The code is contained in the `src/tint/ir` folder and is broken down
|
|
|
|
into several classes. Note, the IR is a Tint _internal_ representation
|
|
|
|
and these files should _never_ appear in the public API.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Builder
|
|
|
|
The `Builder` class provides useful helper routines for creating IR
|
|
|
|
content. The Builder owns an `ir::Module`, it can be created with an
|
|
|
|
existing Module by moving it into the builder. The Module is moved from
|
|
|
|
the builder when it is complete.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Module
|
|
|
|
The top level of the IR is the `Module`. The module stores a list of
|
|
|
|
`functions`, `entry_points`, allocators and various other bits of
|
|
|
|
information needed by the IR. The `Module` also contains a pointer to
|
|
|
|
the `Program` which the IR was created from. The `Program` must outlive
|
|
|
|
the `Module`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The `Module` provides two methods from moving two and from a `Program`.
|
|
|
|
The `Module::FromProgram` static method will take a `Program` and
|
|
|
|
construct an `ir::Module` from the contents. The resulting module class
|
|
|
|
then has a `ToProgram` method which will construct a new `Program` from
|
|
|
|
the `Module` contents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### BuilderImpl
|
|
|
|
The `BuilderImpl` is internally used by the `Module` to do the
|
|
|
|
conversion from a `Program` to a `Module`. This class should not be used
|
|
|
|
outside the `src/tint/ir` folder.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Transforms
|
|
|
|
Similar to the AST a transform system is available for IR. The transform
|
|
|
|
has the same setup as the AST (and inherits from the same base transform
|
|
|
|
class.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note, not written yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Scoping
|
|
|
|
The IR flattens scopes. This also means that the IR will rename shadow
|
|
|
|
variables to be uniquely named in the larger scoped block.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For an example of flattening:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
var x = 1;
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
var y = 2;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
becomes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
var x = 1;
|
|
|
|
var y = 2;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For an example of shadowing:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
var x = 1;
|
|
|
|
if (true) {
|
|
|
|
var x = 2;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
becomes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
var x = 1;
|
|
|
|
if true {
|
|
|
|
var x_1 = 2;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Control Flow Blocks
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At the top level, the AST is broken into a series of control flow nodes.
|
|
|
|
There are a limited set of flow nodes as compared to AST:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Block
|
|
|
|
1. Function
|
|
|
|
1. If statement
|
|
|
|
1. Loop statement
|
|
|
|
1. Switch statement
|
|
|
|
1. Terminator
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the IR is built a stack of control flow blocks is maintained. The
|
|
|
|
stack contains `function`, `loop`, `if` and `switch` control flow
|
|
|
|
blocks. A `function` is always the bottom element in the flow control
|
|
|
|
stack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The current instruction block is tracked. The tracking is reset to
|
|
|
|
`nullptr` when a branch happens. This is used in the statement processing
|
|
|
|
in order to eliminate dead code. If the current block does not exist, or
|
|
|
|
has a branch target, then no further instructions can be added, which
|
|
|
|
means all control flow has branched and any subsequent statements can be
|
|
|
|
disregarded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note, this does have the effect that the inspector _must_ be run to
|
|
|
|
retrieve the module interface before converting to IR. This is because
|
|
|
|
phony assignments in dead code add variables into the interface.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
var<storage> b;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
fn a() {
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
_ = b; // This pulls b into the module interface but would be
|
|
|
|
// dropped due to dead code removal.
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Control Flow Block
|
|
|
|
A block is the simplest control flow node. It contains the instruction
|
|
|
|
lists for a given linear section of codes. A block only has one branch
|
|
|
|
statement which always happens at the end of the block. Note, the branch
|
|
|
|
statement is implicit, it doesn't show up in the expression list but is
|
|
|
|
encoded in the `branch_target`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In almost every case a block does not branch to another block. It will
|
|
|
|
always branch to another control flow node. The exception to this rule
|
|
|
|
is blocks branching to the function end block.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Control Flow Function
|
|
|
|
A function control flow block has two targets associated with it, the
|
|
|
|
`start_target` and the `end_target`. Function flow starts at the
|
|
|
|
`start_target` and ends just before the `end_target`. The `end_target`
|
|
|
|
is always a terminator, it just marks the end of the function
|
|
|
|
(a return is a branch to the function `end_target`).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Control Flow If
|
|
|
|
The if flow node is an `if-else` structure. There are no `else-if`
|
|
|
|
entries, they get moved into the `else` of the `if`. The if control flow
|
|
|
|
node has three targets, the `true_target`, `false_target` and possibly a
|
|
|
|
`merge_target`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The `merge_target` is possibly `nullptr`. This can happen if both
|
|
|
|
branches of the `if` call `return` for instance as the internal branches
|
|
|
|
would jump to the function `end_target`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In all cases, the if node will have a `true_target` and a
|
|
|
|
`false_target`, the target block maybe just a branch to the
|
|
|
|
`merge_target` in the case where that branch of the if was empty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Control Flow Loop
|
|
|
|
All of the loop structures in AST merge down to a single loop control
|
|
|
|
flow node. The loop contains the `start_target`, `continuing_target` and
|
|
|
|
a `merge_target`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the case of a loop, the `merge_target` always exists, but may
|
|
|
|
actually not exist in the control flow. The target is created in order
|
|
|
|
to have a branch for `continue` to branch too, but if the loop body does
|
|
|
|
a `return` then control flow may jump over that block completely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The chain of blocks from the `start_target`, as long as it does not
|
|
|
|
`break` or `return` will branch to the `continuing_target`. The
|
|
|
|
`continuing_target` will possibly branch to the `merge_target` and will
|
|
|
|
branch to the `start_target` for the loop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A while loop is decomposed as listed in the WGSL spec:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
while (a < b) {
|
|
|
|
c += 1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
becomes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
loop {
|
|
|
|
if (!(a < b)) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
c += 1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A for loop is decomposed as listed in the WGSL spec:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
for (var i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
|
|
|
|
c += 1;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
becomes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
var i = 0;
|
|
|
|
loop {
|
|
|
|
if (!(i < 10)) {
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
c += 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
continuing {
|
|
|
|
i++;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Control Flow Switch
|
|
|
|
The switch control flow has a target block for each of the
|
|
|
|
`case/default` labels along with a `merge_target`. The `merge_target`
|
|
|
|
while existing, maybe outside the control flow if all of the `case`
|
|
|
|
branches `return`. The target exists in order to provide a `break`
|
|
|
|
target.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Control Flow Terminator
|
|
|
|
The terminator control flow is only used as the `end_target` of a
|
|
|
|
function. It does not contain instructions and is only used as a marker
|
|
|
|
for the exit of a function.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Expression Lists.
|
|
|
|
Note, this section isn't fully formed as this has not been written at
|
|
|
|
this point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The expression lists are all in SSA form. The SSA variables will keep
|
|
|
|
pointers back to the source AST variables in order for us to not require
|
|
|
|
PHI nodes and to make it easier to move back out of SSA form.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Expressions
|
|
|
|
All expressions in IR are single operations. There are no complex
|
|
|
|
expressions. Any complex expression in the AST is broke apart into the
|
|
|
|
simpler single operation components.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
var a = b + c - (4 * k);
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
becomes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
%t0 = b + c
|
|
|
|
%t1 = 4 * k
|
|
|
|
%v0 = %t0 - %t1
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This also means that many of the short forms `i += 1`, `i++` get
|
|
|
|
expanded into the longer form of `i = i + 1`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Short-Circuit Expressions
|
|
|
|
The short-circuit expressions (e.g. `a && b`) will be convert into an
|
|
|
|
`if` structure control flow.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
let c = a() && b()
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
becomes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
let c = a();
|
|
|
|
if (c) {
|
|
|
|
c = b();
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Registers
|
|
|
|
There are several types of registers used in the SSA form.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Constant Register
|
|
|
|
1. Temporary Register
|
|
|
|
1. Variable Register
|
|
|
|
1. Return Register
|
|
|
|
1. Function Argument Register
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Constant Register
|
|
|
|
The constant register `%c` holds a constant value. All values in IR are
|
|
|
|
concrete, there are no abstract values as materialization has already
|
|
|
|
happened. Each constant register holds a single constant value (e.g.
|
|
|
|
`3.14`) and a pointee to the type (maybe? If needed.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Temporary Register
|
|
|
|
The temporary register `%t` hold the results of a simple operation. The
|
|
|
|
temporaries are created as complex expressions are broken down into
|
|
|
|
pieces. The temporary register tracks the usage count for the register.
|
|
|
|
This allows a portion of a calculation to be pulled out when rebuilding
|
|
|
|
AST as a common calculation. If the temporary is used once it can be
|
|
|
|
re-combine back into a large expression.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Variable Register
|
|
|
|
The variable register `%v` potentially holds a pointer back to source
|
|
|
|
variables. So, while each value is written only once, if the pointer
|
|
|
|
back to an AST variable exists we can rebuild the variable that value
|
|
|
|
was originally created from and can assign back when converting to AST.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Return Register
|
|
|
|
Each function has a return register `%r` where the return value will be
|
|
|
|
stored before the final block branches to the `end_target`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
##### Function Argument Register
|
|
|
|
The function argument registers `%a` are used to store the values being
|
|
|
|
passed into a function call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Type Information
|
|
|
|
The IR shares type information with the SEM. The types are the same, but
|
|
|
|
they may exist in different block allocations. The SEM types will be
|
|
|
|
re-used if they exist, but if the IR needs to create a new type it will
|
|
|
|
be created in the IRs type block allocator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#### Loads / Stores and Deref
|
|
|
|
Note, have not thought about this. We should probably have explicit
|
|
|
|
load/store operations injected in the right spot, but don't know yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Alternatives
|
|
|
|
Instead of going to a custom IR there are several possible other roads
|
|
|
|
that could be travelled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Mutable AST
|
|
|
|
Tint originally contained a mutable AST. This was converted to immutable
|
|
|
|
in order to allow processing over multiple threads and for safety
|
|
|
|
properties. Those desires still hold, the AST is public API, and we want
|
|
|
|
it to be as safe as possible, so keeping it immutable provides that
|
|
|
|
guarantee.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Multiple Transforms With One Program Builder
|
|
|
|
Instead of generating an immutable AST after each transform, running
|
|
|
|
multiple transforms on the single program builder would remove some of
|
|
|
|
the performance penalties of going to and from immutable AST. While this
|
|
|
|
is true, the transforms use a combination of AST and SEM information.
|
|
|
|
When they transform they _do not_ create new SEM information. That
|
|
|
|
means, after a given transform, the SEM is out of date. In order to
|
|
|
|
re-generate the SEM the resolver needs to be rerun. Supporting this
|
|
|
|
would require being very careful on what transforms run together and
|
|
|
|
how they modify the AST.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Adopt An Existing IR
|
|
|
|
There are already several IRs in the while, Mesa has NIR, LLVM has
|
|
|
|
LLVM IR. There are others, adopting one of those would remove the
|
|
|
|
requirements of writing and maintaining our own IR. While that is true,
|
|
|
|
there are several downsides to this re-use. The IRs are internal to the
|
|
|
|
library, so the API isn't public, LLVM IR changes with each iteration of
|
|
|
|
LLVM. This would require us to adapt the AST -> IR -> AST transform for
|
|
|
|
each modification of the IR.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They also end up being lower level then is strictly useful for us. While
|
|
|
|
the IR in Tint is a simplified form, we still have to be able to go back
|
|
|
|
to the high level structured form in order to emit the resulting HLSL,
|
|
|
|
MSL, GLSL, etc. (Only SPIR-V is a good match for the lowered IR form).
|
|
|
|
This transformation back is not a direction other IRs maybe interested
|
|
|
|
in so may have lost information, or require re-determining (determining
|
|
|
|
variables from SSA and PHI nodes for example).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other technical reasons are the maintenance of BUILD.gn and CMake files
|
|
|
|
in order to integrate into our build systems, along with resulting
|
|
|
|
binary size questions from pulling in external systems.
|
|
|
|
|