afonso360 opened PR #6192 from afonso360:riscv-cpuinfo
to bytecodealliance:main
:
:wave: Hey,
This PR adds a second method of extension detection to
cranelift-native
for RISC-V. Namely we can now read the ISA string in/proc/cpuinfo
to query extenstions.The motivation for this is that HWCAP does not expose bits for multi letter extensions (i.e. Zba, Zbb, Zbs). These are all extension that we already have support for in cranelift, but since we can't detect them, they don't get tested with runtests. (So far I've been testing them by force enabling them).
With this method we can now detect them. The second issue is that the current QEMU version does not do
/proc/cpuinfo
emulation, so we need to patch it. The patch in this PR has already been accepted upstream and is queued for QEMU 8.1. The version included here is slightly different since I had to backport it to 7.2.0.Additionally as part of the SIMD work for RISC-V, I discovered that QEMU has a fixed set of bits for HWCAP, and so does not correctly expose the enabled extensions (namely vectors), so I can't run runtests with that either.
I've also tested introducing a bug in one of the Zba lowerings and running CI on that just to doublecheck that all fo this works. (logs)
afonso360 requested jameysharp for a review on PR #6192.
afonso360 requested wasmtime-compiler-reviewers for a review on PR #6192.
afonso360 requested wasmtime-default-reviewers for a review on PR #6192.
afonso360 edited PR #6192:
:wave: Hey,
This PR adds a second method of extension detection to
cranelift-native
for RISC-V. Namely we can now read the ISA string in/proc/cpuinfo
to query extenstions.The motivation for this is that HWCAP does not expose bits for multi letter extensions (i.e. Zba, Zbb, Zbs). These are all extension that we already have support for in cranelift, but since we can't detect them, they don't get tested with runtests. (So far I've been testing them by force enabling them).
Additionally as part of the SIMD work for RISC-V, I discovered that QEMU has a fixed set of bits for HWCAP, and so does not correctly expose the enabled extensions (namely vectors), so I can't run runtests with that either.
With this method we can now detect them. The second issue is that the current QEMU version does not do
/proc/cpuinfo
emulation, so we need to patch it. The patch in this PR has already been accepted upstream and is queued for QEMU 8.1. The version included here is slightly different since I had to backport it to 7.2.0.I've also tested introducing a bug in one of the Zba lowerings and running CI on that just to doublecheck that all fo this works. (logs)
afonso360 edited PR #6192:
:wave: Hey,
This PR adds a second method of extension detection to
cranelift-native
for RISC-V. Namely we can now read the ISA string in/proc/cpuinfo
to query extenstions.The motivation for this is that HWCAP does not expose bits for multi letter extensions (i.e. Zba, Zbb, Zbs). These are all extension that we already have support for in cranelift, but since we can't detect them, they don't get tested with runtests. (So far I've been testing them by force enabling them).
Additionally as part of the SIMD work for RISC-V, I discovered that QEMU has a fixed set of bits for HWCAP, and so does not correctly expose the enabled extensions (namely vectors), so I can't run runtests with that either.
With this method we can now detect them. The second issue is that the current QEMU version does not do
/proc/cpuinfo
emulation, so we need to patch it. The patch in this PR has already been accepted upstream and is queued for QEMU 8.1. The version included here is slightly different since I had to backport it to 7.2.0.I've also tested introducing a bug in one of the Zba lowerings and running CI on that just to doublecheck that all of this works. (logs)
jameysharp submitted PR review.
jameysharp submitted PR review.
jameysharp created PR review comment:
I'm always nervous about using
starts_with
in this way, in case somebody adds another key where the name begins with "isa".I'd prefer to use
l.split_once(':')
. If it returnsSome((k, v))
andk.trim_end() == "isa"
, then we want to parsev.trim()
.Also, usually I prefer to use iterator chains anywhere I can, but in this case I think dealing with the possibility of I/O errors is obscuring the logic. Something like this gets nested more deeply than I'd prefer but I think it's better overall:
for line in BufReader::new(file).lines() { let line = line.map_err(|_| "failed to read /proc/cpuinfo")?; if let Some((k, v)) = line.split_once(':') { if k.trim_end() == "isa" { ... isa_string_extensions(v.trim()) ... return Ok(()); } } } Err("no isa line found in /proc/cpuinfo")
As a further refinement, I think it's reasonable to return
Ok
when theisa
line is not found, in which case you could returnstd::io::Result<()>
and remove all themap_err
calls.
jameysharp created PR review comment:
Returning an iterator can make sense if it lets you avoid heap allocations, but in this case it requires allocating a
Vec
for each group. So I lean toward just accumulating oneVec
for all the results and returning that. This isn't performance-critical, anyway.I think I'd prefer to verify that the
rv64
part is the first one, which we can't cleanly do in an iterator chain, but can do by callingIterator::next
directly.Finally, I fiddled around with different ways to get an iterator over single-character string slices. I like
s.matches(|_| true)
better than having to filter out empty strings fromstr::split
.fn isa_string_extensions(isa: &str) -> Vec<&str> { let mut parts = isa.split('_'); let mut extensions = Vec::new(); // The first entry has the form `rv64imafdcvh`, we need to skip the architecture ("rv64"). // Each of the letters after the cpu architecture is an extension, so return them // individually. if let Some(letters) = parts.next().unwrap().strip_prefix("rv64") { extensions.extend(letters.matches(|_| true)); extensions.extend(parts); } extensions }
afonso360 submitted PR review.
afonso360 created PR review comment:
Yeah, I'm ok with that version as well. I tried to get a version that would just neatly return an iterator without allocating but couldn't get it. I left it in in the hopes that someone in the future would just see that and improve it.
afonso360 updated PR #6192.
afonso360 created PR review comment:
What do you think about this? It avoids all of the nesting, unnecessarily verbose error handling and displays the line parsing logic a bit better.
afonso360 submitted PR review.
jameysharp submitted PR review.
jameysharp created PR review comment:
Works for me, thank you!
afonso360 merged PR #6192.
Last updated: Nov 22 2024 at 16:03 UTC