The Effect of Compiler Optimizations on High-Level Synthesis for FPGAs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We consider the impact of compiler optimizations on the quality of high-level synthesis (HLS)-generated FPGA hardware. Using a HLS tool implemented within the state-of-the-art LLVM [1] compiler, we study the effect of compiler optimizations on the hardware metrics of circuit area, execution cycles, Fmax, and wall-clock time. We evaluate 56 different compiler optimizations implemented within LLVM and show that some optimizations significantly affect hardware quality. Moreover, we show that hardware quality is also affected by the order in which optimizations are applied. We then present a new HLS-directed approach to compiler optimizations, wherein we execute partial HLS and profiling at intermittent points in the optimization process and use the results to judiciously undo the impact of optimization passes predicted to be damaging to the generated hardware quality. Results show that our approach produces circuits with 16% better speed performance, on average, versus using the standard -O3 optimization level.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it