From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
To: Jan Hubicka <hubicka@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Basic kill analysis for modref
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2021 12:00:56 +0100 (CET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <orro3no4-oq49-415n-qso-p5q940rqs169@fhfr.qr> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211112104758.GM17431@kam.mff.cuni.cz>
On Fri, 12 Nov 2021, Jan Hubicka wrote:
> >
> > I wonder why we bother producing summaries for things that do not
> > bind locally? The summary->kills.length () has an upper bound?
>
> Because of local aliases.
> The size of the array is capped by param_max_modref_accesses which is
> 16.
> >
> > > + && summary->kills.length ())
> > > + {
> > > + tree base = ao_ref_base (ref);
> > > + for (unsigned int i = 0; i < summary->kills.length (); i++)
> > > + {
> > > + modref_access_node &a = summary->kills[i];
> > > + tree op;
> > > + poly_offset_int off1_adj = 0, off2_adj = 0;
> > > + poly_int64 off1, off2;
> > > + tree base_ptr = NULL;
> > > + tree base_decl = NULL;
> > > +
> > > + if (a.parm_index >= 0)
> > > + op = gimple_call_arg (stmt, a.parm_index);
> > > + else if (a.parm_index == MODREF_STATIC_CHAIN_PARM)
> > > + op = gimple_call_chain (stmt);
> > > + else
> > > + gcc_unreachable ();
> >
> > I wonder if we can abstract this to a modref_access_node method?
>
> Something like get_param (stmt)? Yes, it looks like a good idea.
> >
> > > +
> > > + off2_adj += a.parm_offset * BITS_PER_UNIT;
> >
> > wasn't there a parm_offset unknown? ...
> Yes, but we do not insert those accesses to kills since they are
> unknown.
> >
> > > + if (!(off2_adj + a.offset).to_shwi (&off2))
> > > + continue;
> > > + if (TREE_CODE (base) == MEM_REF)
> > > + {
> > > + off1_adj = mem_ref_offset (base) << LOG2_BITS_PER_UNIT;
> > > + if (TREE_CODE (TREE_OPERAND (base, 0)) == ADDR_EXPR)
> > > + base_decl = TREE_OPERAND (TREE_OPERAND (base, 0), 0);
> >
> > 'base' will be the decl in this case, apart from when the constant
> > offset doesn't fit ao_ref.offset, so I think you can spare this
> > special-case and give up on non-SSA base_ptr
>
> I tought we wrap decls to modrefs in lto streaming when type merging
> fails?
ao_ref_base returns the result of get_ref_base_and_extent which
unwraps this
> >
> > > + else
> > > + base_ptr = TREE_OPERAND (base, 0);
> > > + }
> > > + /* Give up on TMRs for now. */
> > > + else if (TREE_CODE (base) == TARGET_MEM_REF)
> > > + break;
> > > + else
> > > + base_decl = base;
> > > +
> > > + gcc_checking_assert (!base_decl || DECL_P (base_decl));
> > > + gcc_checking_assert (!base_ptr
> > > + || TREE_CODE (base_ptr) == SSA_NAME);
> > > +
> > > + /* OP is a pointer and we have access range from its
> > > + dereference. */
> > > + if (TREE_CODE (op) == ADDR_EXPR)
> > > + {
> > > + poly_int64 size, offset, max_size;
> > > + bool reverse;
> > > + tree op_base = get_ref_base_and_extent
> > > + (TREE_OPERAND (op, 0), &offset, &size,
> > > + &max_size, &reverse);
> >
> > I think you want get_addr_base_and_unit_offset here. All
> > variable indexed addresses are in separate stmts. That also means
> > you can eventually work with just byte sizes/offsets?
>
> Will do. The access range in modref summary is bit based (since we want
> to disabiguate bitfields like we do in rest of alias oracle) but indeed
> this part cna be in bytes.
> >
> > > + if (!known_size_p (size) || !known_eq (size, max_size))
> > > + continue;
> > > + off2_adj += offset;
> > > + /* &str->foo are not passed as gimple operands directly,
> > > + would need to look up the def stmt. */
> > > + gcc_checking_assert (TREE_CODE (op_base) != MEM_REF);
> > > + if (!base_decl
> > > + || compare_base_decls (op_base, base_decl) != 1)
> > > + continue;
> > > + }
> > > + else if (!base_ptr || !operand_equal_p (base_ptr, op))
> > > + continue;
> > > +
> > > + if (!(off1_adj + ref->offset).to_shwi (&off1))
> > > + continue;
> > > + if (!(off2_adj + a.offset).to_shwi (&off2))
> > > + continue;
> > > +
> > > + if (known_subrange_p (off1, ref->max_size, off2, a.size)
> > > + && dbg_cnt (ipa_mod_ref))
> > > + {
> > > + /* For store to be killed it needs to not be used earlier. */
> > > + if (ref_maybe_used_by_call_p_1 (as_a <gcall *> (stmt), ref,
> > > + true))
> >
> > Hmm, so moderf says p->x is killed when we have
> >
> > foo (struct X *p)
> > {
> > int tem = p->x;
> > p->x = 0;
> > return tem;
> > }
> >
> > ? Or even
> Yep, this will currently land in kills. I can add loop pruning kills
> with known load ranges incrementally.
> >
> > foo (struct X *p)
> > {
> > bar ();
> > p->x = 0;
> > }
> >
> > ?
> Here we will end up with reading global memory and that will turn kills
> empty in modref.
>
> The check is still needed to verify that ref is not passed as aggregate
> parameter.
>
> I will update patch.
> Thanks,
> Honza
> >
> > Otherwise it looks sensible.
> >
> > Richard.
>
--
Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Maxfeldstrasse 5, 90409 Nuernberg,
Germany; GF: Ivo Totev; HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-12 11:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-11-11 12:58 Jan Hubicka
2021-11-12 10:38 ` Richard Biener
2021-11-12 10:47 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-11-12 11:00 ` Richard Biener [this message]
2021-11-14 18:53 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-11-15 18:51 ` H.J. Lu
2021-11-15 19:00 ` Jeff Law
2021-11-15 20:56 ` Jan Hubicka
2021-11-16 8:19 ` Jan Hubicka
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=orro3no4-oq49-415n-qso-p5q940rqs169@fhfr.qr \
--to=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hubicka@kam.mff.cuni.cz \
/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).