From: Hongtao Liu <crazylht@gmail.com>
To: Segher Boessenkool <segher@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Richard Biener <richard.guenther@gmail.com>,
Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>,
Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>,
liuhongt <hongtao.liu@intel.com>,
GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] CALL_INSN may not be a real function call.
Date: Wed, 7 Jul 2021 23:32:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMZc-bxbHrrXhkPYJ9R5yZAi3tYMwyo+pV20Qg3bzr2X6=78Sg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210707145238.GL1583@gate.crashing.org>
On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 10:54 PM Segher Boessenkool
<segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 10:15:08AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 4:40 AM Hongtao Liu via Gcc-patches
> > <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 9:37 AM Hongtao Liu <crazylht@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2021 at 7:31 AM Segher Boessenkool
> > > > <segher@kernel.crashing.org> wrote:
> > > > > I ran into this in shrink-wrap.c today.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jun 03, 2021 at 02:54:07PM +0800, liuhongt via Gcc-patches wrote:
> > > > > > Use "used" flag for CALL_INSN to indicate it's a fake call. If it's a
> > > > > > fake call, it won't have its own function stack.
> > > > >
> > > > > Could you document somewhere what a "fake call" *is*? Including what
> > > > > that means to RTL, how this is expected to be used, etc.? In rtl.h is
> > > > fake call is used for TARGET_INSN_CALLEE_ABI, i'll add comments for
> > > > #define FAKE_CALL_P(RTX) in rtl.h
> > >
> > >
> > > Here's the patch I'm going to check in.
>
> Which doesn't do any of the things I asked for :-( It doesn't say what
> a "fake call" is, it doesn't say what its semantics are, it doesn't say
> how it is exected to be used.
>
> So, a "FAKE_CALL" is very much a *real* call, on the RTL level, which is
> where we are here. But you want it to be treated differently because it
> will eventually be replaced by different insns.
It's CALL_INSN on the rtl level, but it's just a normal instruction
that it doesn't have a call stack, and it doesn't affect the control
flow
>
> This causes all kinds of unrelated code to need confusing changes, made
> much worse because the name "FAKE_CALL" is the opposite of what it does.
>
> As long as your description of it only says how it is (ab)used in one
> case, I will call it a hack, and a gross hack at that.
>
>
> > > --- a/gcc/rtl.h
> > > +++ b/gcc/rtl.h
> > > @@ -840,7 +840,13 @@ struct GTY(()) rtvec_def {
> > > #define CALL_P(X) (GET_CODE (X) == CALL_INSN)
> > >
> > > /* 1 if RTX is a call_insn for a fake call.
> > > - CALL_INSN use "used" flag to indicate it's a fake call. */
> > > + CALL_INSN use "used" flag to indicate it's a fake call.
> > > + Used by the x86 vzeroupper instruction,
> > > + in order to solve the problem of partial clobber registers,
> > > + vzeroupper is defined as a call_insn with a special callee_abi,
> > > + but it is not a real call and therefore has no function stack
> > > + of its own.
>
> So because of this one thing (you need to insert partial clobbers) you
> force all kinds of unrelated code to have changes, namely, code thatt
> needs to do something with calls, but now you do not want to have that
> doone on some calls because you promise that call will disappear
> eventually, and it cannot cause any problems in the mean time?
>
> I am not convinced. This is not design, this is a terrible hack, this
> is the opposite direction we should go in.
Quote from https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2021-May/570634.html
> Also i grep CALL_P or CALL_INSN in GCC source codes, there are many
> places which hold the assumption CALL_P/CALL_INSN is a real call.
> Considering that vzeroupper is used a lot on the i386 backend, I'm a
> bit worried that this implementation solution will be a bottomless
> pit.
Maybe, but I think the same is true for CLOBBER_HIGH. If we have
a third alternative then we should consider it, but I think the
call approach is still going to be less problematic then CLOBBER_HIGH.
The main advantage of the call approach is that the CALL_P handling
is (mostly) conservatively correct and performance problems are just
a one-line change. The CLOBBER_HIGH approach instead requires
changes to the way that passes track liveness information for
non-call instructions (so is much more than a one-line change).
Also, treating a CLOBBER_HIGH like a CLOBBER isn't conservatively
correct, because other code might be relying on part of the register
being preserved.
>
> > that doesn't set up a stack frame is fake as well? Maybe
> >
> > "CALL_INSN use "used" flag to indicate the instruction
> > does not transfer control."
> >
> > thus that this call is not affecting regular control flow? (it might
> > eventually still trap and thus cause non-call EH?)
>
> How it is used in shrink-wrap requires it to not have a stack frame (in
> the compiler sense).
>
> > Not sure if "no function stack of its own" is a good constraint,
> > vzeroupper does not perform any call or jump.
>
> Yeah. This stuff needs a rethink.
>
> What is wrong with just using an unspec and clobbers?
>
>
> Segher
--
BR,
Hongtao
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-07-07 15:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-13 9:23 [PATCH] [i386] Fix _mm256_zeroupper to notify LRA that vzeroupper will kill sse registers. [PR target/82735] Hongtao Liu
2021-05-13 9:40 ` Uros Bizjak
2021-05-13 9:43 ` Uros Bizjak
2021-05-13 9:54 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-05-13 11:32 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-05-13 11:37 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-05-13 11:52 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-05-14 2:27 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-05-17 8:44 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-05-17 9:56 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-05-18 13:12 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-05-18 15:18 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-05-25 6:04 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-05-25 6:30 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-05-27 5:07 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-05-27 7:05 ` Uros Bizjak
2021-06-01 2:24 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-06-03 6:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] CALL_INSN may not be a real function call liuhongt
2021-06-03 6:54 ` [PATCH 2/2] Fix _mm256_zeroupper by representing the instructions as call_insns in which the call has a special vzeroupper ABI liuhongt
2021-06-04 2:56 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-06-04 6:26 ` Uros Bizjak
2021-06-04 6:34 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-06-07 19:04 ` [PATCH] x86: Don't compile pr82735-[345].c for x32 H.J. Lu
2021-06-04 2:55 ` [PATCH 1/2] CALL_INSN may not be a real function call Hongtao Liu
2021-06-04 7:50 ` Jakub Jelinek
2021-07-05 23:30 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-07-06 0:03 ` Jeff Law
2021-07-06 1:49 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-07-07 14:55 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-07-07 17:56 ` Jeff Law
2021-07-06 1:37 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-07-07 2:44 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-07-07 8:15 ` Richard Biener
2021-07-07 14:52 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-07-07 15:23 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-07-07 23:42 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-07-08 4:14 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-07-07 15:32 ` Hongtao Liu [this message]
2021-07-07 23:54 ` Segher Boessenkool
2021-07-09 7:20 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-07-07 15:52 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-05-27 7:20 ` [PATCH] [i386] Fix _mm256_zeroupper to notify LRA that vzeroupper will kill sse registers. [PR target/82735] Jakub Jelinek
2021-05-27 10:50 ` Richard Sandiford
2021-06-01 2:22 ` Hongtao Liu
2021-06-01 2:25 ` Hongtao Liu
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='CAMZc-bxbHrrXhkPYJ9R5yZAi3tYMwyo+pV20Qg3bzr2X6=78Sg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=crazylht@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hongtao.liu@intel.com \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=richard.guenther@gmail.com \
--cc=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=segher@kernel.crashing.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).