Skip to content

Handle additional multireg args #43870

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Dec 2, 2020
Merged

Handle additional multireg args #43870

merged 3 commits into from
Dec 2, 2020

Conversation

@CarolEidt
Copy link
Contributor

@CarolEidt CarolEidt commented Oct 27, 2020

No description provided.

@Dotnet-GitSync-Bot Dotnet-GitSync-Bot added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label Oct 27, 2020
@CarolEidt CarolEidt force-pushed the EnregNonHfaMultiReg branch from a341ccf to 668c6fb Compare October 29, 2020 21:27
This was referenced Oct 30, 2020
Closed
Open
@CarolEidt CarolEidt mentioned this pull request Nov 12, 2020
Merged
@CarolEidt
Copy link
Contributor Author

CarolEidt commented Nov 23, 2020

@dotnet/jit-contrib PTAL

BruceForstall
BruceForstall approved these changes Nov 24, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@BruceForstall BruceForstall left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Any diffs?

@runfoapp runfoapp bot mentioned this pull request Nov 25, 2020
Open
@CarolEidt
Copy link
Contributor Author

CarolEidt commented Dec 1, 2020

Here are the diffs for Arm64 and x64/ux:

Arch OS What Delta Methods Improved Methods Regressed
Arm64 Windows Crossgen fx+benchmarks -48672 (-0.04%) 2785 1126
x64 Linux Crossgen fx+benchmarks -80288 (-0.08%) 3342 739
Arm64 Windows PMI fx+benchmarks -77788 (-0.13%) 4667 1140
x64 Linux PMI fx+benchmarks -109433 (-0.21%) 5347 1101

I've sampled some of the regressions, and here are the 3 sources of regressions I've seen (all of the examples below occur on both Arm64 and x64/ux):

  • Tail calls are rejected if there is a promoted struct parameter

    • SPC.dll System.Decimal:Parse(System.ReadOnlySpan`1[Char],int,System.IFormatProvider):System.Decimal (method hash 0xd422ae6c)
    • SPC.dll System.MemoryExtensions:Trim(System.ReadOnlySpan1[Char],System.ReadOnlySpan1[Char]):System.ReadOnlySpan`1[Char] (method hash 0xff09f8a4)

  • Worse codegen for a block copy from a promoted struct to a field of an object. Although the address is put into a local variable, we lose the ability to reuse the value after it's incremented by the helper. Also, we use CORINFO_HELP_CHECKED_ASSIGN_REF instead of CORINFO_HELP_ASSIGN_BYREF. This happens on both Arm64 and x64/ux:

    • xunit.console.dll <>c:b__6_0(System.Collections.Generic.KeyValuePair`2[[System.String, System.Private.CoreLib, Version=6.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=7cec85d7bea7798e],[System.String, System.Private.CoreLib, Version=6.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=7cec85d7bea7798e]]):System.Action``1[[System.Xml.Linq.XElement, System.Private.Xml.Linq, Version=6.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=cc7b13ffcd2ddd51]]:this (method hash 0xff355c80)

  • Plus a few instances where the code gets larger because clone a loop.

@CarolEidt CarolEidt requested a review from sandreenko December 1, 2020 17:21
sandreenko
sandreenko approved these changes Dec 1, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@sandreenko sandreenko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

src/coreclr/src/jit/lclvars.cpp Outdated
if ((structPromotionInfo.fieldCnt != 2) &&
!((structPromotionInfo.fieldCnt == 1) && varTypeIsSIMD(structPromotionInfo.fields[0].fldType)))
{
JITDUMP("Not promoting multireg struct local V%02u, because lvIsParam is true and #fields != 2\n",
Copy link
Contributor

@sandreenko sandreenko Dec 1, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
JITDUMP("Not promoting multireg struct local V%02u, because lvIsParam is true and #fields != 2\n",
JITDUMP("Not promoting multireg struct local V%02u, because lvIsParam is true and #fields != 2 and not a single SIMD?\n",

Copy link
Contributor Author

@CarolEidt CarolEidt Dec 2, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done - with a minor rewording

@CarolEidt CarolEidt merged commit e065c28 into dotnet:master Dec 2, 2020
@CarolEidt CarolEidt deleted the EnregNonHfaMultiReg branch December 2, 2020 00:23
This was referenced Dec 2, 2020
Closed
Closed
Closed
@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jan 1, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Reviewers

2 more reviewers

@BruceForstall BruceForstall BruceForstall approved these changes

@sandreenko sandreenko sandreenko approved these changes

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@CarolEidt @BruceForstall @sandreenko @Dotnet-GitSync-Bot