bjorn3 (Dec 16 2021 at 17:53): bjorn3 (Dec 16 2021 at 17:53):I just compared the build performance of cg_clif with cranelift 0.78.0 (which is from before isle, right?) against 0.79.0. The performance difference is within noise.
Chris Fallin (Dec 16 2021 at 18:11):That's great, thanks! That that aligns with earlier measurements from fitzgen on Wasmtime
bjorn3 (Dec 16 2021 at 18:16):On less positive news, it looks like there is a regression: https://github.com/bjorn3/rustc_codegen_cranelift/runs/4551314054?check_suite_focus=true#step:11:3420
Chris Fallin (Dec 16 2021 at 18:18):Hmm, it's possible that a narrow-value case might have changed in some of the instruction migrations? Our test coverage for this could be better (... thanks for filling in the gaps in the meantime :-/ )
Chris Fallin (Dec 16 2021 at 18:18):if you can reduce it to some CLIF, I can take a look
bjorn3 (Dec 16 2021 at 18:20):sure, working on it.
bjorn3 (Dec 16 2021 at 18:37):For signed integers the following tests fail:
const A: $T = 0b0101100;
const B: $T = 0b0100001;
const C: $T = 0b1111001;
const _0: $T = 0;
const _1: $T = !0;
#[test]
fn test_count_zeros() {
assert_eq!(A.count_zeros(), $T::BITS - 3);
assert_eq!(B.count_zeros(), $T::BITS - 2);
assert_eq!(C.count_zeros(), $T::BITS - 5);
}
#[test]
fn test_rotate() {
assert_eq!(A.rotate_left(6).rotate_right(2).rotate_right(4), A);
assert_eq!(B.rotate_left(3).rotate_left(2).rotate_right(5), B);
assert_eq!(C.rotate_left(6).rotate_right(2).rotate_right(4), C);
// Rotating these should make no difference
//
// We test using 124 bits because to ensure that overlong bit shifts do
// not cause undefined behaviour. See #10183.
assert_eq!(_1.rotate_left(124), _1);
}
and for unsigned integers the following:
const A: $T = 0b0101100;
const B: $T = 0b0100001;
const C: $T = 0b1111001;
const _0: $T = 0;
const _1: $T = !0;
#[test]
fn test_count_zeros() {
assert!(A.count_zeros() == $T::BITS - 3);
assert!(B.count_zeros() == $T::BITS - 2);
assert!(C.count_zeros() == $T::BITS - 5);
}
#[test]
fn test_rotate() {
assert_eq!(A.rotate_left(6).rotate_right(2).rotate_right(4), A);
assert_eq!(B.rotate_left(3).rotate_left(2).rotate_right(5), B);
assert_eq!(C.rotate_left(6).rotate_right(2).rotate_right(4), C);
// Rotating these should make no difference
//
// We test using 124 bits because to ensure that overlong bit shifts do
// not cause undefined behaviour. See #10183.
assert_eq!(_1.rotate_left(124), _1);
assert_eq!(_1.rotate_right(124), _1);
}
Some assertions only fail for 8bit or 16bit integers.
Chris Fallin (Dec 16 2021 at 18:39):OK, if you can get it down to a CLIF runtest that fails, it's probably (hopefully) a simple fix in masking or something like that...
bjorn3 (Dec 16 2021 at 18:40):.count_zeros() maps to popcnt on the bitwise inverse of the value. The rotate methods to rotl/rotr.
bjorn3 (Dec 16 2021 at 18:46):I can't find the shift amount masking in the new rotl/rotr implementation anymore. It used to be at https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/blob/c1a6a0523dbc59d176f708ea3d04e6edb48480ec/cranelift/codegen/src/isa/x64/lower.rs#L2485-L2488
Chris Fallin (Dec 16 2021 at 18:52):Hmm, indeed, that seems to have been missed
Chris Fallin (Dec 16 2021 at 18:56):Putting together a fix for this now
Chris Fallin (Dec 16 2021 at 19:39):@bjorn3 let me know if this fixes the issue for you: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/pull/3610
bjorn3 (Dec 16 2021 at 19:44):I will check it out tomorrow.
bjorn3 (Dec 17 2021 at 09:48):<i16>::count_zeros is codegened as
00000000000282dd <_RNvMs_NtCs1K2K8gQcegq_4core3nums11count_zeros>:
282dd: 55 push %rbp
282de: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
282e1: f7 d7 not %edi
282e3: f3 0f b8 f7 popcnt %edi,%esi
282e7: 0f b7 f6 movzwl %si,%esi
282ea: 48 89 f0 mov %rsi,%rax
282ed: 48 89 ec mov %rbp,%rsp
282f0: 5d pop %rbp
282f1: c3 retq
The popcnt %edi, %esi is a 32bit popcount, while it should be 16bit. <i8>::count_zeros is codegened as:
0000000000029ef5 <_RNvMNtCs1K2K8gQcegq_4core3numa11count_zeros>:
29ef5: 55 push %rbp
29ef6: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
29ef9: f7 d7 not %edi
29efb: f3 0f b8 f7 popcnt %edi,%esi
29eff: 40 0f b6 f6 movzbl %sil,%esi
29f03: 48 89 f0 mov %rsi,%rax
29f06: 48 89 ec mov %rbp,%rsp
29f09: 5d pop %rbp
29f0a: c3 retq
It seems like the popcnt codegen code didn't change beteen cranelift 0.78.0 and 0.79.0 though.
bjorn3 (Dec 17 2021 at 09:56):Looks like before cranelift 0.79.0 the not only applies to 8 or 16bit and the rest of the register happened to be zero by chance:
00000000000282dd <_RNvMs_NtCs1K2K8gQcegq_4core3nums11count_zeros>:
282dd: 55 push %rbp
282de: 48 89 e5 mov %rsp,%rbp
282e1: 66 f7 d7 not %di
282e4: f3 0f b8 f7 popcnt %edi,%esi
282e8: 0f b7 f6 movzwl %si,%esi
282eb: 48 89 f0 mov %rsi,%rax
282ee: 48 89 ec mov %rbp,%rsp
282f1: 5d pop %rbp
282f2: c3 retq
Hmm, OK. I have limited time today then am off for two weeks, unfortunately, so I don't think I can pick this back up today; can you file an issue for this?
bjorn3 (Dec 17 2021 at 18:18):Done: https://github.com/bytecodealliance/wasmtime/issues/3615
Last updated: Dec 23 2024 at 12:05 UTC