From: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@ucw.cz>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tree-optimization/106912 - IPA profile and pure/const
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 14:18:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4DAmmo3AZfH+YqB@kam.mff.cuni.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <nycvar.YFH.7.77.849.2211251302130.7009@jbgna.fhfr.qr>
> On Fri, 25 Nov 2022, Jan Hubicka wrote:
>
> > >
> > >
> > > > Am 25.11.2022 um 11:05 schrieb Jan Hubicka via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >>
> > > >> IPA profile instrumentation tries to clear the pure and const
> > > >> flags of functions but that's quite hopeless in particular for
> > > >> const since that attribute prevails on the type and thus on each
> > > >> call to the function leading to inconsistencies in the IL and
> > > >> eventual checking ICEs. There's no good reason to do this and
> > > >> it wouldn't fixup any indirect calls so just don't. No other
> > > >> instrumentation GCC does bothers about this.
> > > >
> > > > This was mostly meant to deadl with situation where we auto-detect
> > > > function to be const and then partially inline it to a loop.
> > > > Then both caller and callee accesses same counters in the memory and if
> > > > you move load/stores out of the loop in caller you lose counters and get
> > > > inconsistencies at profile read-in time.
> > >
> > > Don?t we Instrument after partial inlining now? As said, since we have the fntype on the call this doesn?t work anymore for const functions via attributes.
> >
> > Full inlining can cause problem already. So for code like
> >
> > do
> > {
> > if (__builtin_expect (test,1))
> > a+=foo (a);
> > else
> > a+=foo (b);
> > } while (....);
> > we may end up inlining one of the two invocation. Then caller and callee
> > will modify the same counter. If we handle the remaining call as const,
> > we can hoist the counter modifications out of the loop and mix them up.
> >
> > I remember I run into an actual example of this problem during GCC
> > bootstrap. There the function was auto-detected to be const by
> > early pure-const pass so type was not an problem. You are right we ought
> > to do something about types since the scenario above can happen with foo
> > being declared with an attribute as well.
>
> Or by doing the first call as
>
> volatile int __attribute__((const)) (*foop)(int) = foo;
>
> a += (*foop) (a);
>
> you'd need to get all calls that might possibly call an instrumented
> function adjusted.
>
> I think if we're taking this issue serious we'd have to simply
> ignore const/pure attributes at parsing time and refrain from
> auto-detecting as well, at least for address-taken functions?
I think that is also not a good idea, since we would have to do that
with -fprofile-use, too (so the CFG at the instrumentation time
matches) and it would lead to poor perofrmance with FDO.
The idea was to honor pure/const during early opt and undo the
attributes when profiling is inserted.
We have fixup_cfg to compensate for attribute changes. We could
probably keep tract if any instrumented code was ever inlined into a
given function and perhaps just start ignoring attributes set on types?
Honza
>
> That said, this adjustment in the "wrong" direction causes problems
> downstream, which is what the fixed PR is about (simd cloning picks
> up the wrong things, or rather possibly fails to clone the attributes?).
>
> Richard.
>
> > Honza
> > >
> > > Richard
> > > > Honza
> > > >>
> > > >> Bootstrap and regtest pending on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu, OK?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Richard.
> > > >>
> > > >> PR tree-optimization/106912
> > > >> * tree-profile.cc (tree_profiling): Do not clear pure/const
> > > >> flags.
> > > >>
> > > >> * gcc.dg/pr106912.c: New testcase.
> > > >> ---
> > > >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr106912.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++
> > > >> gcc/tree-profile.cc | 3 ---
> > > >> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > > >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr106912.c
> > > >>
> > > >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr106912.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr106912.c
> > > >> new file mode 100644
> > > >> index 00000000000..8faa877d8b3
> > > >> --- /dev/null
> > > >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/pr106912.c
> > > >> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
> > > >> +/* { dg-do compile } */
> > > >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fPIC -ftree-vectorize -fprofile-generate" } */
> > > >> +
> > > >> +__attribute__ ((__simd__))
> > > >> +__attribute__ ((__nothrow__ , __leaf__ , __const__))
> > > >> +double foo (double x);
> > > >> +void bar(double *f, int n)
> > > >> +{
> > > >> + int i;
> > > >> + for (i = 0; i < n; i++)
> > > >> + f[i] = foo(f[i]);
> > > >> +}
> > > >> +double foo(double x)
> > > >> +{
> > > >> + return x * x / 3.0;
> > > >> +}
> > > >> diff --git a/gcc/tree-profile.cc b/gcc/tree-profile.cc
> > > >> index 2beb49241f2..5491b398870 100644
> > > >> --- a/gcc/tree-profile.cc
> > > >> +++ b/gcc/tree-profile.cc
> > > >> @@ -814,9 +814,6 @@ tree_profiling (void)
> > > >> /* Don't profile functions produced for builtin stuff. */
> > > >> if (DECL_SOURCE_LOCATION (node->decl) == BUILTINS_LOCATION)
> > > >> continue;
> > > >> -
> > > >> - node->set_const_flag (false, false);
> > > >> - node->set_pure_flag (false, false);
> > > >> }
> > > >>
> > > >> /* Update call statements and rebuild the cgraph. */
> > > >> --
> > > >> 2.35.3
> >
>
> --
> Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
> SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg,
> Germany; GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman;
> HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-25 13:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-25 7:59 Richard Biener
2022-11-25 10:05 ` Jan Hubicka
2022-11-25 12:05 ` Richard Biener
2022-11-25 12:11 ` Jan Hubicka
2022-11-25 13:05 ` Richard Biener
2022-11-25 13:18 ` Jan Hubicka [this message]
2022-11-25 20:26 ` Richard Biener
2023-03-16 11:21 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-03-16 12:05 ` Richard Biener
2023-03-16 12:13 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-03-16 12:22 ` Richard Biener
2023-03-16 14:11 ` Richard Biener
2023-03-16 14:27 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-03-17 19:40 ` Jan Hubicka
2023-03-17 19:54 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-03-20 8:33 ` Richard Biener
2023-03-24 10:25 ` Richard Biener
2023-03-24 11:49 ` Jan Hubicka
2023-03-24 13:05 ` Jan Hubicka
2023-03-24 13:07 ` Richard Biener
2023-03-24 13:18 ` Jan Hubicka
2023-03-17 19:09 ` Jan Hubicka
2023-03-17 19:27 ` Jakub Jelinek
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=Y4DAmmo3AZfH+YqB@kam.mff.cuni.cz \
--to=hubicka@ucw.cz \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
/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).