Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
38 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
59 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
41 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
7 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
50 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Large Language Models for Compiler Optimization (2309.07062v1)

Published 11 Sep 2023 in cs.PL, cs.AI, cs.CL, and cs.LG

Abstract: We explore the novel application of LLMs to code optimization. We present a 7B-parameter transformer model trained from scratch to optimize LLVM assembly for code size. The model takes as input unoptimized assembly and outputs a list of compiler options to best optimize the program. Crucially, during training, we ask the model to predict the instruction counts before and after optimization, and the optimized code itself. These auxiliary learning tasks significantly improve the optimization performance of the model and improve the model's depth of understanding. We evaluate on a large suite of test programs. Our approach achieves a 3.0% improvement in reducing instruction counts over the compiler, outperforming two state-of-the-art baselines that require thousands of compilations. Furthermore, the model shows surprisingly strong code reasoning abilities, generating compilable code 91% of the time and perfectly emulating the output of the compiler 70% of the time.

LLMs for Compiler Optimization: An Analytical Overview

The application of LLMs in the software engineering space has largely been centered around tasks such as code generation, translation, and testing. However, the paper "LLMs for Compiler Optimization" explores a relatively uncharted use of LLMs: optimizing compiler output for improved code size and performance. With the aim to advance the interplay between machine learning and traditional compiler techniques, the authors present a detailed and methodical approach to employing a 7B-parameter transformer model in optimizing LLVM assembly.

Methodology and Approach

The model architecture employed is adapted from LLaMa 2 and comprises training from scratch on a large corpus of LLVM assembly code. The authors emphasize that the model takes unoptimized assembly as input and outputs compiler options aimed at achieving optimal program performance. Unlike conventional models that utilize numeric or graph-based representations which may lose information, this LLM takes advantage of LLVM's complete textual representation, enabling nuanced optimization strategies.

A unique aspect of the training regimen is the inclusion of auxiliary learning tasks. During training, the model predicts the instruction counts before and after optimization while also generating the optimized code. These auxiliary tasks are shown to significantly enhance the model's effectiveness, underscoring the depth of code understanding acquired by the model.

Evaluation and Results

The paper evaluates the model on a comprehensive suite of test programs and reports a 3.0% reduction in instruction count over baseline compiler optimizations, surpassing two state-of-the-art baselines that rely on iterative compilation. Moreover, the LLM can produce compilable code 91% of the time and emulate compiler outputs accurately 70% of the time. These impressive results suggest not only the model's efficacy in identifying optimization opportunities but also in directly implementing them.

Implications and Future Directions

The findings presented have both practical and theoretical implications. Practically, the reduction in code size translates to potential gains in execution efficiency and resource utilization in computational systems. Theoretically, this work challenges the long-standing heuristic-driven approaches in compiler design by demonstrating that data-driven approaches, specifically LLMs, can autonomously learn complex optimization policies.

The paper also opens avenues for further exploration. The current limitations related to sequence length restrict the model's application to individual LLVM-IR functions rather than entire modules, which contrasts sharply with the vast optimization landscapes available in larger, real-world software projects. Future research could integrate methods to expand context windows in LLMs, allowing for more holistic program optimization.

Another promising area is the enhancement of the model's mathematical and logical reasoning capabilities. Given the challenges in constant folding and arithmetic reasoning observed, the authors suggest chain-of-thought approaches and active learning paradigms to bolster the LLM’s reasoning precision.

Conclusion

"LLMs for Compiler Optimization" provides a pioneering look into the potential of using LLMs for compiler optimization tasks traditionally dominated by heuristic and algorithmic approaches. While offering significant progress, this work serves as a catalyst for future research endeavors aimed at refining LLMs' capabilities in both code reasoning and optimization, ultimately broadening their application to more advanced software engineering challenges. This research marks a significant step toward realizing intelligent systems capable of optimizing code autonomously, promising sizeable impacts on the efficiency and capability of software systems across domains.

User Edit Pencil Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
Authors (11)
  1. Chris Cummins (23 papers)
  2. Volker Seeker (6 papers)
  3. Dejan Grubisic (6 papers)
  4. Mostafa Elhoushi (22 papers)
  5. Youwei Liang (16 papers)
  6. Jonas Gehring (14 papers)
  7. Fabian Gloeckle (5 papers)
  8. Kim Hazelwood (16 papers)
  9. Gabriel Synnaeve (97 papers)
  10. Hugh Leather (23 papers)
  11. Baptiste Roziere (13 papers)
Citations (33)