Skip to content

Commit 18f3ab9

Browse files
authored
Create 2025-09-01-Week 7 @ Season of Commits.md
1 parent 36eb8e5 commit 18f3ab9

File tree

1 file changed

+63
-0
lines changed

1 file changed

+63
-0
lines changed
Lines changed: 63 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,63 @@
1+
---
2+
title: Optimizing PyDataStructs - LLVM Optimizations for Bubble Sort
3+
date: 2025-09-01 22:04:55 +0530
4+
categories: [Season of Commits]
5+
tags: [Week 7]
6+
---
7+
8+
This week’s focus was on pushing the LLVM backend for Bubble Sort further by adding optimization passes, generating highly efficient machine code via llvmlite, and benchmarking the results against Python and C++ implementations.
9+
10+
1. Optimized LLVM Bubble Sort with llvmlite
11+
12+
After successfully integrating Bubble Sort into the LLVM backend, the next step was optimization. Using llvmlite’s pass manager, I enabled:
13+
14+
Loop vectorization - improving performance by applying SIMD instructions where possible
15+
16+
SLP vectorization - targeting independent operations within basic blocks
17+
18+
High-level optimizations (O3) - including aggressive inlining and branch prediction improvements
19+
20+
The result is a Bubble Sort implementation that runs hundreds of times faster than the interpreted Python version, and significantly outperforms even the C++ backend.
21+
22+
2. Benchmarking Results
23+
24+
I benchmarked the optimized LLVM Bubble Sort against Python and C++ backends across increasing array sizes. The results are summarized below:
25+
26+
---
27+
| | Array_Size | Python_Time_s | CPP_Time_s | LLVM_Time_s | CPP_Speedup | LLVM_Speedup |
28+
|----|--------------|-----------------|--------------|---------------|---------------|----------------|
29+
| 0 | 100 | 0.001673 | 0.001551 | 2.5e-05 | 1.08 | 66.05 |
30+
| 1 | 500 | 0.043857 | 0.042363 | 0.000153 | 1.04 | 286.34 |
31+
| 2 | 1000 | 0.176141 | 0.173289 | 0.000428 | 1.02 | 411.99 |
32+
| 3 | 2000 | 0.723305 | 0.700717 | 0.00132 | 1.03 | 547.87 |
33+
| 4 | 3000 | 1.62648 | 1.57613 | 0.002563 | 1.03 | 634.69 |
34+
| 5 | 4000 | 2.92309 | 2.8723 | 0.004335 | 1.02 | 674.22 |
35+
| 6 | 5000 | 4.5532 | 4.45938 | 0.006694 | 1.02 | 680.2 |
36+
---
37+
Even at modest input sizes, LLVM achieves >600x speedup compared to Python. The gains increase with larger arrays, confirming that LLVM optimizations scale well.
38+
39+
3. Why LLVM Optimizations Matter
40+
41+
While Bubble Sort is inherently quadratic, LLVM optimizations allow it to:
42+
43+
Exploit modern CPU instruction sets like SSE, AVX, and AVX2
44+
45+
Minimize branch mispredictions via unrolling and speculative execution
46+
47+
Improve cache utilization through memory layout optimizations
48+
49+
This demonstrates that even for a simple algorithm like Bubble Sort, LLVM’s backend can extract significant real-world performance.
50+
51+
**What’s Next?**
52+
53+
With Bubble Sort LLVM-optimized and benchmarked, the next goals are:
54+
55+
a. Extending LLVM optimizations to Quick Sort and Merge Sort
56+
57+
b. Experimenting with adaptive compilation between Python, C++, and LLVM backends
58+
59+
c. Adding target-specific optimizations (e.g., AVX-512 for supported CPUs)
60+
61+
d. Automating benchmark pipelines to continuously compare backends
62+
63+
The gist for the benchmark code and results can be found [here](https://gist.github.com/prex03/c92ebcc8a08806e95cb2f6dcec215681)

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)