Previously, omitting unnecessary DWARF unwinds was only done in two
cases:
* For Darwin + aarch64, if no DWARF unwind info is needed for all the
functions in a TU, then the `__eh_frame` section would be omitted
entirely. If any one function needed DWARF unwind, then MC would emit
DWARF unwind entries for all the functions in the TU.
* For watchOS, MC would omit DWARF unwind on a per-function basis, as
long as compact unwind was available for that function.
This diff makes it so that we omit DWARF unwind on a per-function basis
for Darwin + aarch64 as well. In addition, we introduce the flag
`--emit-dwarf-unwind=` which can toggle between `always`,
`no-compact-unwind` (only emit DWARF when CU cannot be emitted for a
given function), and the target platform `default`. `no-compact-unwind`
is particularly useful for newer x86_64 platforms: we don't want to omit
DWARF unwind for x86_64 in general due to possible backwards compat
issues, but we should make it possible for people to opt into this
behavior if they are only targeting newer platforms.
**Motivation:** I'm working on adding support for `__eh_frame` to LLD,
but I'm concerned that we would suffer a perf hit. Processing compact
unwind is already expensive, and that's a simpler format than EH frames.
Given that MC currently produces one EH frame entry for every compact
unwind entry, I don't think processing them will be cheap. I tried to do
something clever on LLD's end to drop the unnecessary EH frames at parse
time, but this made the code significantly more complex. So I'm looking
at fixing this at the MC level instead.
**Addendum:** It turns out that there was a latent bug in the X86
backend when `OmitDwarfIfHaveCompactUnwind` is naively enabled, which is
not too surprising given that this combination has not been heretofore
used.
For functions that have unwind info that cannot be encoded with CU, MC
would end up dropping both the compact unwind entry (OK; existing
behavior) as well as the DWARF entries (not OK). This diff fixes things
so that we emit the DWARF entry, as well as a CU entry with encoding
`UNWIND_X86_MODE_DWARF` -- this basically tells the unwinder to look for
the DWARF entry. I'm not 100% sure the `UNWIND_X86_MODE_DWARF` CU entry
is necessary, this was the simplest fix. ld64 seems to be able to handle
both the absence and presence of this CU entry. Ultimately ld64 (and
LLD) will synthesize `UNWIND_X86_MODE_DWARF` if it is absent, so there
is no impact to the final binary size.
Reviewed By: davide, lhames
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D122258
-Rename Mode*Bit to Is*Bit to match X86Subtarget.
-Rename FeatureLAHFSAHF to FeatureLAFHSAFH64 to match X86Subtarget.
-Use consistent capitalization
Reviewed By: skan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121975
Move out the table and prepare the code to reuse it for the reverse mapping.
Follows the example of memory folding/unfolding tables in X86InstrFoldTables.cpp
Preparation step to unify `llvm::X86::getRelaxedOpcodeArith` and
`getShortArithOpcode` in BOLT X86MCPlusBuilder.cpp.
Addresses https://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/2022-January/154526.html
Reviewed By: skan, MaskRay
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D121402
[NFC] As part of using inclusive language within the llvm project, this patch
renames master flag to main flag in these comments.
Reviewed By: ZarkoCA
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D114090
This moves the registry higher in the LLVM library dependency stack.
Every client of the target registry needs to link against MC anyway to
actually use the target, so we might as well move this out of Support.
This allows us to ensure that Support doesn't have includes from MC/*.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111454
On some architectures such as Arm and X86 the encoding for a nop may
change depending on the subtarget in operation at the time of
encoding. This change replaces the per module MCSubtargetInfo retained
by the targets AsmBackend in favour of passing through the local
MCSubtargetInfo in operation at the time.
On Arm using the architectural NOP instruction can have a performance
benefit on some implementations.
For Arm I've deleted the copy of the AsmBackend's MCSubtargetInfo to
limit the chances of this causing problems in the future. I've not
done this for other targets such as X86 as there is more frequent use
of the MCSubtargetInfo and it looks to be for stable properties that
we would not expect to vary per function.
This change required threading STI through MCNopsFragment and
MCBoundaryAlignFragment.
I've attempted to take into account the in tree experimental backends.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45962
As suggested on D107370, this patch renames the tuning feature flags to start with 'Tuning' instead of 'Feature'.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D107459
So far, support for x86_64-linux-gnux32 has been handled by explicit
comparisons of Triple.getEnvironment() to GNUX32. This worked as long as
x86_64-linux-gnux32 was the only X32 environment to worry about, but we
now have x86_64-linux-muslx32 as well. To support this, this change adds
an isX32() function and uses it. It replaces all checks for GNUX32 or
MuslX32 by isX32(), except for the following:
- Triple::isGNUEnvironment() and Triple::isMusl() are supposed to treat
GNUX32 and MuslX32 differently.
- computeTargetTriple() needs to be able to transform triples to add or
remove X32 from the environment and needs to map GNU to GNUX32, and
Musl to MuslX32.
- getMultiarchTriple() completely lacks any Musl support and retains the
explicit check for GNUX32 as it can only return x86_64-linux-gnux32.
Reviewed By: MaskRay
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103777
This adds support to the X86 backend for the newly committed swiftasync
function parameter. If such a (pointer) parameter is present it gets stored
into an augmented frame record (populated in IR, but generally containing
enhanced backtrace for coroutines using lots of tail calls back and forth).
The context frame is identical to AArch64 (primarily so that unwinders etc
don't get extra complexity). Specfically, the new frame record is [AsyncCtx,
%rbp, ReturnAddr], and its presence is signalled by bit 60 of the stored %rbp
being set to 1. %rbp still points to the frame pointer in memory for backwards
compatibility (only partial on x86, but OTOH the weird AsyncCtx before the rest
of the record is because of x86).
Recommited with a fix for unwind info when i386 pc-rel thunks are
adjacent to a prologue.
This adds support to the X86 backend for the newly committed swiftasync
function parameter. If such a (pointer) parameter is present it gets stored
into an augmented frame record (populated in IR, but generally containing
enhanced backtrace for coroutines using lots of tail calls back and forth).
The context frame is identical to AArch64 (primarily so that unwinders etc
don't get extra complexity). Specfically, the new frame record is [AsyncCtx,
%rbp, ReturnAddr], and its presence is signalled by bit 60 of the stored %rbp
being set to 1. %rbp still points to the frame pointer in memory for backwards
compatibility (only partial on x86, but OTOH the weird AsyncCtx before the rest
of the record is because of x86).
In 16-bit mode, some of the nop patterns used in 32-bit mode can end up
mangling other instructions. For instance, an aligned "movz" instruction
may have the 0x66 and 0x67 prefixes omitted, because the nop that's used
messes things up.
xorl %ebx, %ebx
.p2align 4, 0x90
movzbl (%esi,%ebx), %ecx
Use instead nop patterns we know 16-bit mode can handle.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D97268
Fix PR48742: the D75203 assembler optimization locates MCRelaxableFragment's
within two MCSymbol's and relaxes some MCRelaxableFragment's to reduce the size
of a MCAlignFragment. A -g build has more MCSymbol's and therefore may have
different assembler output (e.g. a MCRelaxableFragment (jmp) may have 5 bytes
with -O1 while 2 bytes with -O1 -g).
`.p2align 4, 0x90` is common due to loops. For a larger program, with a
lot of temporary labels, the assembly output difference is somewhat
destined. The cost seems to overweigh the benefits so we default to
-x86-pad-for-align=false until the heuristic is improved.
Reviewed By: skan
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D94542
Summary:
Before this patch, `relaxInstruction` takes three arguments, the first
argument refers to the instruction before relaxation and the third
argument is the output instruction after relaxation. There are two quite
strange things:
1) The first argument's type is `const MCInst &`, the third
argument's type is `MCInst &`, but they may be aliased to the same
variable
2) The backends of ARM, AMDGPU, RISC-V, Hexagon assume that the third
argument is a fresh uninitialized `MCInst` even if `relaxInstruction`
may be called like `relaxInstruction(Relaxed, STI, Relaxed)` in a
loop.
In this patch, we drop the thrid argument, and let `relaxInstruction`
directly modify the given instruction. Also, this patch fixes the bug https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45580, which is introduced by D77851, and
breaks the assumption of ARM, AMDGPU, RISC-V, Hexagon.
Reviewers: Razer6, MaskRay, jyknight, asb, luismarques, enderby, rtaylor, colinl, bcain
Reviewed By: Razer6, MaskRay, bcain
Subscribers: bcain, nickdesaulniers, nathanchance, wuzish, annita.zhang, arsenm, dschuff, jyknight, dylanmckay, sdardis, nemanjai, jvesely, nhaehnle, tpr, sbc100, jgravelle-google, kristof.beyls, hiraditya, aheejin, kbarton, fedor.sergeev, asb, rbar, johnrusso, simoncook, sabuasal, niosHD, jrtc27, MaskRay, zzheng, edward-jones, atanasyan, rogfer01, MartinMosbeck, brucehoult, the_o, PkmX, jocewei, Jim, lenary, s.egerton, pzheng, sameer.abuasal, apazos, luismarques, kerbowa, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D78364
Summary:
The instruction in non-text section can not be executed, so they will not affect performance.
In addition, their encoding values are treated as data, so we should not touch them.
Reviewers: MaskRay, reames, LuoYuanke, jyknight
Reviewed By: MaskRay
Subscribers: annita.zhang, hiraditya, llvm-commits
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77971
Summary:
Since D75300 has been landed, I want to support enhanced relaxation when we need to align branches and allow prefix padding. "Enhanced Relaxtion" means we allow an instruction that could not be traditionally relaxed to be emitted into RelaxableFragment so that we increase its length by adding prefixes for optimization.
The motivation is straightforward, RelaxFragment is mostly for relative jumps and we can not increase the length of jumps when we need to align them, so if we need to achieve D75300's purpose (reducing the bytes of nops) when need to align jumps, we have to make more instructions "relaxable".
Reviewers: reames, MaskRay, craig.topper, LuoYuanke, jyknight
Reviewed By: reames
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits, annita.zhang
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76286
Generalizes D62014 (R_386_NONE/R_X86_64_NONE).
Unlike ARM (D76746) and AArch64 (D76754), we cannot delete FK_NONE from
getFixupKindSize because FK_NONE is still used by R_386_TLS_DESC_CALL/R_X86_64_TLSDESC_CALL.
Summary:
There is a tiny logic error of D75300, making branch is not
correctly aligned with option -x86-pad-max-prefix-size
Reviewers: reames, MaskRay, craig.topper, LuoYuanke, jyknight
Reviewed By: reames
Subscribers: hiraditya, llvm-commits, annita.zhang
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D76285
alignBranches is X86 specific, change the name in a
more general one since other target can do some state
chang before and after emitting the instruction.
Now that D75203 has landed and baked for a few days, extend the basic approach to prefix padding as well. The patch itself is fairly straight forward.
For the moment, this patch adds the functional support and some basic testing there of, but defaults to not enabling prefix padding. I want to be able to phrase a separate patch which adds the target specific reasoning and test it cleanly. I haven't decided whether I want to common it with the nop logic or not.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75300
Lets us remove another SLM proc family flag usage.
This is NFC, but we should probably check whether atom/glm/knl? should be using this flag as well...
Summary:
Currently, a BoundaryAlign fragment may be inserted after the branch
that needs to be aligned to truncate the current fragment, this fragment is
unused at most of time. To avoid that, we can insert a new empty Data
fragment instead. Non-relaxable instruction is usually emitted into Data
fragment, so the inserted empty Data fragment will be reused at a high
possibility.
Reviewers: annita.zhang, reames, MaskRay, craig.topper, LuoYuanke, jyknight
Reviewed By: reames, LuoYuanke
Subscribers: llvm-commits, dexonsmith, hiraditya
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75438
Summary: X86 can reduce the bytes of NOP by padding instructions with prefixes to get a better peformance in some cases. So a private member function `determinePaddingPrefix` is added to determine which prefix is the most suitable.
Reviewers: annita.zhang, reames, MaskRay, craig.topper, LuoYuanke, jyknight
Reviewed By: reames
Subscribers: llvm-commits, dexonsmith, hiraditya
Tags: #llvm
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75357
If we have an explicit align directive, we currently default to emitting nops to fill the space. As discussed in the context of the prefix padding work for branch alignment (D72225), we're allowed to play other tricks such as extending the size of previous instructions instead.
This patch will convert near jumps to far jumps if doing so decreases the number of bytes of nops needed for a following align. It does so as a post-pass after relaxation is complete. It intentionally works without moving any labels or doing anything which might require another round of relaxation.
The point of this patch is mainly to mock out the approach. The optimization implemented is real, and possibly useful, but the main point is to demonstrate an approach for implementing such "pad previous instruction" approaches. The key notion in this patch is to treat padding previous instructions as an optional optimization, not as a core part of relaxation. The benefit to this is that we avoid the potential concern about increasing the distance between two labels and thus causing further potentially non-local code grown due to relaxation. The downside is that we may miss some opportunities to avoid nops.
For the moment, this patch only implements a small set of existing relaxations.. Assuming the approach is satisfactory, I plan to extend this to a broader set of instructions where there are obvious "relaxations" which are roughly performance equivalent.
Note that this patch *doesn't* change which instructions are relaxable. We may wish to explore that separately to increase optimization opportunity, but I figured that deserved it's own separate discussion.
There are possible downsides to this optimization (and all "pad previous instruction" variants). The major two are potentially increasing instruction fetch and perturbing uop caching. (i.e. the usual alignment risks) Specifically:
* If we pad an instruction such that it crosses a fetch window (16 bytes on modern X86-64), we may cause the decoder to have to trigger a fetch it wouldn't have otherwise. This can effect both decode speed, and icache pressure.
* Intel's uop caching have particular restrictions on instruction combinations which can fit in a particular way. By moving around instructions, we can both cause misses an change misses into hits. Many of the most painful cases are around branch density, so I don't expect this to be too bad on the whole.
On the whole, I expect to see small swings (i.e. the typical alignment change problem), but nothing major or systematic in either direction.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D75203
Guillaume Chatelet