public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/98737] New: Atomic operation on x86 no optimized to use flags
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2021 19:59:19 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-98737-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=98737

            Bug ID: 98737
           Summary: Atomic operation on x86 no optimized to use flags
           Product: gcc
           Version: 11.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P3
         Component: target
          Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
          Reporter: drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com
  Target Milestone: ---

Consider the following code:

long a;

_Bool f(long b)
{
  return __atomic_sub_fetch(&a, b, __ATOMIC_RELEASE) == 0;
}

_Bool g(long b)
{
  return (a -= b) == 0;
}


When compiling for x86-64 with the current HEAD as of 20210118 the resulting
code is:

0000000000000000 <f>:
   0:   48 f7 df                neg    %rdi
   3:   48 89 f8                mov    %rdi,%rax
   6:   f0 48 0f c1 05 00 00    lock xadd %rax,0x0(%rip)        # f <f+0xf>
   d:   00 00 
   f:   48 01 f8                add    %rdi,%rax
  12:   0f 94 c0                sete   %al
  15:   c3                      retq   
  16:   66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00    nopw   %cs:0x0(%rax,%rax,1)
  1d:   00 00 00 

0000000000000020 <g>:
  20:   48 29 3d 00 00 00 00    sub    %rdi,0x0(%rip)        # 27 <g+0x7>
  27:   0f 94 c0                sete   %al
  2a:   c3                      retq   

The code for f is far too complicated.  All that needs to be different from the
code in g is that the lock prefix must be used for sub.

Probably all __atomic_* builtins have problems with using flags when possible.

This is not an esoteric problem.  I was specifically looking at optimizing the
std::latch implementation for C++20 and this is what would be needed.  Without
a fix a special version would be needed or the current, much worse code is
used.

             reply	other threads:[~2021-01-18 19:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-18 19:59 drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com [this message]
2021-01-19  7:55 ` [Bug target/98737] " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-19  8:37 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
2021-01-19  9:53 ` redi at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-19 10:01 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-26 15:09 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-26 16:45 ` drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com
2021-01-26 17:11 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-01-26 20:10 ` drepper.fsp+rhbz at gmail dot com
2021-12-14 10:20 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-03 13:17 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-12 15:50 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-14 11:07 ` cvs-commit at gcc dot gnu.org

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-98737-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).