Update README

This commit is contained in:
Jef
2019-03-07 13:59:50 +01:00
parent 45ccc591cd
commit 3f3de16bc4

159
README.md
View File

@@ -4,6 +4,165 @@ Lightbeam is an optimising one-pass streaming compiler for WebAssembly, intended
[wasmtime]: https://github.com/CraneStation/wasmtime [wasmtime]: https://github.com/CraneStation/wasmtime
## Quality of output
Already - with a very small number of relatively simple optimisation rules - Lightbeam produces surprisingly high-quality output considering how restricted it is. It even produces better code than Cranelift, FireFox or both for some workloads. Here's a very simple example, this recursive fibonacci function in Rust:
```rust
fn fib(n: i32) -> i32 {
if n == 0 || n == 1 {
1
} else {
fib(n - 1) + fib(n - 2)
}
}
```
When compiled with optimisations enabled, rustc will produce the following WebAssembly:
```rust
(module
(func $fib (param $p0 i32) (result i32)
(local $l1 i32)
(set_local $l1
(i32.const 1))
(block $B0
(br_if $B0
(i32.lt_u
(get_local $p0)
(i32.const 2)))
(set_local $l1
(i32.const 1))
(loop $L1
(set_local $l1
(i32.add
(call $fib
(i32.add
(get_local $p0)
(i32.const -1)))
(get_local $l1)))
(br_if $L1
(i32.gt_u
(tee_local $p0
(i32.add
(get_local $p0)
(i32.const -2)))
(i32.const 1)))))
(get_local $l1)))
```
FireFox's optimising compiler produces the following assembly (labels cleaned up somewhat):
```asm
fib:
sub rsp, 0x18
cmp qword ptr [r14 + 0x28], rsp
jae stack_overflow
mov dword ptr [rsp + 0xc], edi
cmp edi, 2
jae .Lelse
mov eax, 1
mov dword ptr [rsp + 8], eax
jmp .Lreturn
.Lelse:
mov dword ptr [rsp + 0xc], edi
mov eax, 1
mov dword ptr [rsp + 8], eax
.Lloop:
mov edi, dword ptr [rsp + 0xc]
add edi, -1
call 0
mov ecx, dword ptr [rsp + 8]
add ecx, eax
mov dword ptr [rsp + 8], ecx
mov ecx, dword ptr [rsp + 0xc]
add ecx, -2
mov dword ptr [rsp + 0xc], ecx
cmp ecx, 1
ja .Lloop
.Lreturn:
mov eax, dword ptr [rsp + 8]
nop
add rsp, 0x18
ret
```
Cranelift with optimisations enabled produces similar:
```asm
fib:
push rbp
mov rbp, rsp
sub rsp, 0x20
mov qword ptr [rsp + 0x10], rdi
mov dword ptr [rsp + 0x1c], esi
mov eax, 1
mov dword ptr [rsp + 0x18], eax
mov eax, dword ptr [rsp + 0x1c]
cmp eax, 2
jb .Lreturn
movabs rax, 0
mov qword ptr [rsp + 8], rax
.Lloop:
mov eax, dword ptr [rsp + 0x1c]
add eax, -1
mov rcx, qword ptr [rsp + 8]
mov rdx, qword ptr [rsp + 0x10]
mov rdi, rdx
mov esi, eax
call rcx
mov ecx, dword ptr [rsp + 0x18]
add eax, ecx
mov dword ptr [rsp + 0x18], eax
mov eax, dword ptr [rsp + 0x1c]
add eax, -2
mov dword ptr [rsp + 0x1c], eax
mov eax, dword ptr [rsp + 0x1c]
cmp eax, 1
ja .Lloop
.Lreturn
mov eax, dword ptr [rsp + 0x18]
add rsp, 0x20
pop rbp
ret
```
Whereas Lightbeam produces code with far fewer memory accesses than both (and fewer blocks than FireFox's output):
```asm
fib:
xor eax, eax
cmp esi, 2
setb al
mov ecx, 1
test eax, eax
jne .Lreturn
mov eax, 1
.Lloop:
mov rcx, rsi
add ecx, 0xffffffff
push rsi
push rax
mov rsi, rcx
call 0
add eax, dword ptr [rsp]
mov rcx, qword ptr [rsp + 8]
add ecx, 0xfffffffe
xor edx, edx
cmp ecx, 1
seta dl
mov rsi, rcx
add rsp, 0x10
test edx, edx
jne .Lloop
mov rcx, rax
.Lreturn:
mov rax, rcx
ret
```
Now obviously I'm not advocating for replacing FireFox's optimising compiler with Lightbeam since the latter can only really produce better code when receiving optimised WebAssembly (and so debug-mode or hand-written WebAssembly may produce much worse output). However, this shows that even with the restrictions of a streaming compiler it's absolutely possible to produce high-quality assembly output. For the assembly above, the Lightbeam output runs within 15% of native speed. This is paramount for one of Lightbeam's intended usecases for real-time systems that want good runtime performance but cannot tolerate compiler bombs.
## Specification compliance ## Specification compliance
It's hard to judge, since each test in the spec testsuite covers a wide range of features (to check their interactions), but currently 31 out of 77 of the spec suite tests pass when run in Wasmtime with Lightbeam as a backend. Here's the full test output: It's hard to judge, since each test in the spec testsuite covers a wide range of features (to check their interactions), but currently 31 out of 77 of the spec suite tests pass when run in Wasmtime with Lightbeam as a backend. Here's the full test output: