Add VisitStmt_ method for AssertStmtNode and StringImmNode #18389
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @jikechao, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request significantly improves the robustness of the TIR FLOP estimator by introducing new visitor methods for Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request adds missing visitor methods for AssertStmtNode and StringImmNode to the TIR FLOP estimator, which is a good fix to prevent crashes during analysis. The implementation for StringImmNode is correct. However, the visitor for AssertStmtNode could be improved for accuracy. It currently includes the FLOPs for evaluating the assertion message, which is only executed on the exceptional path when the assertion fails. For a more accurate estimation of the main execution path, the message's cost should be excluded.
| TResult VisitStmt_(const AssertStmtNode* op) override { | ||
| TResult result = VisitExpr(op->condition); | ||
| if (op->message.defined()) { | ||
| result += VisitExpr(op->message); | ||
| } | ||
| result += VisitStmt(op->body); | ||
| return result; | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The cost of evaluating the assertion message should likely be excluded from the FLOP count. The message is only evaluated on the exceptional path when the assertion fails, whereas FLOP estimation is typically concerned with the performance of the successful execution path. Including the message's FLOPs could lead to an overestimation, especially if the message formatting involves computations.
TResult VisitStmt_(const AssertStmtNode* op) override {
TResult result = VisitExpr(op->condition);
result += VisitStmt(op->body);
return result;
}
2 participants
This PR adds missing visitor methods in the TIR FLOP estimator to handle
AssertStmtNodeandStringImmNode. The fix ensures that FLOP estimation properly processes assertion statements and string literals without throwing internal errors, improving the robustness of the FLOP analysis pass.Fix #18387
cc @tqchen @mshr-h @cbalint13