## Overview¶

FormaK aims to combine symbolic modeling for fast, efficient system modelling with code generation to create performant code that is easy to use.

The Five Key Elements the library provides to achieve this user experience are:

- Python Interface to define models
- Python implementation of the model and supporting tooling
- Integration to scikit-learn to leverage the model selection and parameter tuning functions
- C++ and Python to C++ interoperability for performance
- C++ interfaces to support a variety of model uses

This design focuses on experimenting with the possible performance benefits from the straightforward (common subexpression elimination) to the magical: super-optimization.

The performance is relevant in two key ways:

- Evaluating the runtime of the output program vs the current system
- Evaluating the compile time of the super-optimizing program to see if it is sufficiently fast to be usable

This design is experimental in nature, so the end goal is only to collect this data to establish a data point from which future work can proceed. There is no goal to have this design be a full feature of the project.

### Superoptimization¶

Superoptimization is the process of searching to find the optimal code sequence to compute a function.

For this design, the approach will be to perform a search on the compute graph to find the sequence of operations that lead to the fastest possible computation. To do that search, a CPU model will be used to allow for mapping operations to a more detailed sense of time (vs assigning each operation a fixed time), primarily focusing on modeling memory latency and CPU instruction pipelining. This will allow the search to model the state of the CPU at each instruction and have a better approximation of the total time to compute the sequence.

## Solution Approach¶

### Search¶

By taking a graph-based approach, the search algorithm `A*`

(A-star) can be
used to speed up the search with heuristics. The key to using `A*`

search
effectively is a heuristic that is quick to compute, admissible and consistent.

a heuristic function is said to be

admissibleif it never overestimates the cost of reaching the goal, i.e. the cost it estimates to reach the goal is not higher than the lowest possible cost from the current point in the path

a heuristic function is said to be

consistent, … if its estimate is always less than or equal to the estimated distance from any neighboring vertex to the goal, plus the cost of reaching that neighbor.

The quick to compute part is relevant because the end to end search time could end up being slower if it’s faster to evaluate some large portion of the graph than to evaluate the heuristic function. In this case, given that the CPU model may grow to be somewhat complex, the heuristic should have a low hurdle to step over (or a high ceiling to step under?).

### CPU Model¶

The CPU model used in this superoptimization will focus on a few key features of CPUs: pipelining of independent operations and memory load latency. This focus comes because the modeling of these two effects is approximately tractable and the two effects should have a straightforward implications for the output graph:

- If you can change the order of two compute operations so more are running in parallel via pipelining than the overall compute will be faster.
- If you can load some memory earlier, than later computations may not need to wait as long

For kicks, they’re also parts of the CPU I’m interested in modeling.

Pull Request: #26 Commit: 42b0e0c

# Why?¶

Superoptimization is an exciting compiler process that can lead to significant
performance improvements not available any other way; however, it's
implementation is decidedly... "not trivial". Given that, I opted to make this
a time-bounded experiment where I could explore the concept, practice
implementing a neat and tidy algorithm (`A*`

search) and maybe unlock
optimizations for the future of the project.

In the end, I ran into issues where the required searching may outstrip my patience for waiting to see if the algorithm worked, but I do think the approach has promise.

Getting started for the year with a fixed time task also made it easy to start the year with a definite contribution. I ended the year with a feature that dragged on for a while, so going to the opposite approach was appealing.

# What's next?¶

The next feature will be implementing some portion of the netcode enhancement, but that's still to-be-determined.