From 3eb5ece62533048d4b85f0538aeb52887740bb73 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Benjamin Bouvier Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2022 18:13:26 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Add meeting notes for 2022-06-13 Cranelift meeting (#4263) Feel free to add suggestions / amend wherever is needed. --- meetings/cranelift/2022/cranelift-06-13.md | 56 ++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 56 insertions(+) diff --git a/meetings/cranelift/2022/cranelift-06-13.md b/meetings/cranelift/2022/cranelift-06-13.md index 8f507404f6..564e6bf74d 100644 --- a/meetings/cranelift/2022/cranelift-06-13.md +++ b/meetings/cranelift/2022/cranelift-06-13.md @@ -17,4 +17,60 @@ ### Attendees +- abrown +- akirilov +- avanhatt +- bjorn3 +- bnjbvr +- cfallin +- fitzgen +- jlbirch +- sparker-arm + ### Notes + +Agenda item: + +- bnjbvr: who owns the cranelift-jit-demo repo? is it collective responsibility? meta + question: how do we decide that in general? +- cfallin: meta question, probably a bytecode alliance thingy, RFC to discuss. + For this particular repo, would github's CODEOWNERS work? +- bnjbvr: explains how CODEOWNERS works. Not a solution for merge right. Github + has different allowance access for individuals, so could give merge rights to + a specific individual. +- cfallin: either open an RFC, or discuss this at next wasmtime meeting + +Updates: + +- sparker-arm: aarch64 vector work, benchmarking, moving along well, no PR opened yet +- cfallin: worked with egraph, subsumes GVN now, LICM soon. Question is how + does the rewrite system look like? Now that something works, write up an RFC + and see what people think. +- avanhatt: lots of verification updates, half way reviewing egraph PR +- bnjbvr: work paused the last two weeks on incremental cache, back to it this week +- akirilov: PAC (pointer authentication) work in fiber has been merged, CI uses PAC now, RFC + patch to + be updated soon + - cfallin: that's on linux aarch64, how far are we from enabling for mac + m1? + - akirilov: codegen changes was easy, unwinding harder, not sure about + the complexity for mac m1. + - bjorn3: mac m1's ABI is slightly different from linux aarch64's one +- jlbirch: talked about security concerns with Alex re: sightglass / + benchmarking. + - cfallin: how will this work? bot? manual trigger? + - jlbirch: anyone with sufficient permissions can comment/open issue to run + a workflow run (repository dispatch event), private repo will run the + PRs, do the testing and send the results back to the PR/issue. This will + be running on private machines (linux x64, linux aarch64). +- sparker-arm: limit egraph optimizations, how does it work? + - cfallin: fuel mechanism to limit # (number of) rules of application, metric on + memory usage (# nodes, classes), hard cap this to some multiple of # + cranelift input nodes. + - sparker-arm: (*notetaker missed that question*) + - cfallin: no rewrites at all at the moment, just hash-const. Turn up knob to + get several optimization rounds. + - avanhatt: would we do inter-procedural analysis in the future? ie allow + rules to rewrite across function boundaries somehow? + - cfallin: prob not. Could blow up memory/time, so we'd need to explore. + We'd do that only if we inlined that callsite already (so not across + function boundaries)