digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 6189] New: register content destroyed in function prolog
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (40/40) Jun 21 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (6/6) Jun 21 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (29/29) Aug 29 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (8/8) Aug 29 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (15/15) Aug 29 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (8/8) Nov 22 2011 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (36/36) Jan 13 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (6/6) Jan 13 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (45/45) May 21 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (20/20) May 21 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (27/27) May 21 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (8/26) May 22 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (13/39) May 22 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (8/9) May 22 2012 This bug depends completely on register allocation and defies logic or
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (9/9) May 22 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (9/9) May 22 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
- d-bugmail puremagic.com (12/12) May 22 2012 http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
Summary: register content destroyed in function prolog
Product: D
Version: D2
Platform: x86_64
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Keywords: wrong-code
Severity: major
Priority: P2
Component: DMD
AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
ReportedBy: dawg dawgfoto.de
--- Comment #0 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2011-06-21 05:52:01 PDT ---
struct FPoint {
float x, y;
}
void constructBezier(FPoint p0, FPoint p1, FPoint p2, ref FPoint[3] quad) {
quad[0] = p0;
quad[1] = FPoint(p1.x, p1.y);
quad[$-1] = p2;
}
void main() {
auto p0 = FPoint(0, 0);
auto p1 = FPoint(1, 1);
auto p2 = FPoint(2, 2);
// avoid inline of call
FPoint[3] quad;
auto f = &constructBezier;
f(p0, p1, p2, quad);
assert(quad == [p0, p1, p2]);
}
---
This code will fail if compiled with optimization.
The issue is that quad variable is assigned to a register during the function.
In the function prolog quad is move from it's parameter register to the target
register while another parameter still resides in that register.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jun 21 2011
d-bugmail puremagic.com http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189 --- Comment #1 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2011-06-21 11:08:30 PDT --- *** Issue 6042 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jun 21 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
--- Comment #2 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2011-08-29 09:56:49 PDT ---
I've further dissected this bug.
Chain of infection.
- p1 (passed in RDX) is marked as being not register candidate
because it is used in an OPrelconst (probably p1.x/p1.y)
- => Symbol for p1 doesn't get a live range
- => blcodgen doesn't mark regcon.used for RDX because parameter isn't marked
alive in entry block
if (s->Sclass & SCfastpar &&
regcon.params & mask[s->Spreg] &&
vec_testbit(dfoidx,s->Srange))
{
regcon.used |= mask[s->Spreg];
}
- => cgreg_assign for quad figures DX is a neat register to assign quad to
(passed in RDI)
- => nobody is responsible for saving fastpars and the function prolog creates
a mov RDX, RDI before RDX is saved
There are two things involved which work suboptimal for the ABI64 conventions.
I. The current way of marking a fastpar register as being used effectively
prevents cgreg_assign to leave them in this register.
II. With the 32 LinkD ABI there was only one register parameter. So moving it
in the function prolog couldn't conflict with other parameters.
Both of them can be improved but still they won't guarantee a proper fix for
this bug.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Aug 29 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189 --- Comment #3 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2011-08-29 10:02:49 PDT --- That is you can not have working prolog code if parameter register locations and function register locations are crossing each other without temporary storage, e.g. swap(RDI, RSI). -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Aug 29 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189 --- Comment #4 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2011-08-29 10:31:41 PDT --- Rough sketch of improvements. I. cgreg_assign/cgreg_benefit (cgreg.c) When doing register benefit calculation, add block weights for the fastpar register if the symbol is still contained in it. Decrease benefit by -1 for other registers. II. prolog (cod3.c) Strictly sort parameter movings in the following order. Register to stack, Register to register, Stack to register. Keep track of used registers and add an assertion that moving to a register is not conflicting. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Aug 29 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189 --- Comment #5 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2011-11-22 12:53:46 PST --- This test case doesn't reproduce the bug since xmmregs are used for floating point. Disabling fpxmmregs still reproduces the bug. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Nov 22 2011
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
--- Comment #6 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2012-01-13 04:43:54 PST ---
struct Point(T)
{
T x, y;
}
alias Point!int IPoint;
alias Point!float FPoint;
void calcCoeffs(uint half, IPoint pos, ref FPoint[2] pts, uint=0)
{
pos.x &= ~(half - 1);
pos.y &= ~(half - 1);
immutable float xo = pos.x;
immutable float yo = pos.y;
pts[0].x -= xo;
pts[0].y -= yo;
pts[1].x -= xo;
pts[1].y -= yo;
}
void main()
{
auto pos = IPoint(2, 2);
FPoint[2] pts;
pts[0] = pts[1] = FPoint(3, 3);
auto f = &calcCoeffs;
f(2, pos, pts);
assert(pts[0].x == 1);
assert(pts[0].y == 1);
assert(pts[1].x == 1);
assert(pts[1].y == 1);
}
----
This one happens with xmmregs too.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 13 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189 --- Comment #7 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2012-01-13 04:45:03 PST --- https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/521 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
Jan 13 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |clugdbug yahoo.com.au
Version|D2 |D1 & D2
Summary|register content destroyed |[64bit] optimizer: vector
|in function prolog |register content destroyed
| |in function prolog
Severity|major |critical
--- Comment #8 from Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> 2012-05-21 04:33:14 PDT ---
Modified test case applies to D1 as well. I hoped this was a duplicate of bug
8095 or 8060, but it isn't.
struct Point(T)
{
T x, y;
}
alias Point!(int) IPoint;
alias Point!(float) FPoint;
void calcCoeffs(uint half, IPoint pos, FPoint[2] *pts, uint q)
{
pos.x &= ~(half - 1);
pos.y &= ~(half - 1);
float xo = pos.x;
float yo = pos.y;
(*pts)[0].x -= xo;
(*pts)[0].y -= yo;
(*pts)[1].x -= xo;
(*pts)[1].y -= yo;
}
void main()
{
auto pos = IPoint(2, 2);
FPoint[2] pts;
pts[0] = pts[1] = FPoint(3, 3);
auto f = &calcCoeffs;
f(2, pos, &pts, 0);
assert(pts[0].x == 1);
assert(pts[0].y == 1);
assert(pts[1].x == 1);
assert(pts[1].y == 1);
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 21 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
--- Comment #9 from Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> 2012-05-21 06:14:16 PDT ---
Reduced test case (compile with -m64 -O):
void bug6189(int half, int[2] pos, float[3] *pts, int unused)
{
pos[0] += half;
(*pts)[0] = pos[0];
(*pts)[1] = pos[1];
(*pts)[2] = half;
}
void main()
{
int[2] pos = [2,2];
float[3] pts = [0.0, 0.0, 0.0];
bug6189(0, pos, &pts, 0);
assert(pts[0] == 2);
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 21 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
--- Comment #10 from Don <clugdbug yahoo.com.au> 2012-05-21 07:09:29 PDT ---
My reduction in comment 9 was valid only for D2, this one is valid for D1 as
well (again compile with -m64 -O):
---------------------------
struct IPoint {
int x, y;
}
void bug6189(uint half, IPoint pos, float[4] *pts, uint unused) {
pos.y += half;
float xo = pos.x;
float yo = pos.y;
(*pts)[0] = xo;
(*pts)[1] = yo;
(*pts)[2] = xo;
}
void main()
{
auto pos = IPoint(2, 2);
float[4] pts;
pts[0] = pts[1] = pts[2] = pts[3] = 0;
bug6189(0, pos, &pts, 0);
assert(pts[0] == 2);
}
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 21 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
--- Comment #11 from Leandro Lucarella <leandro.lucarella sociomantic.com>
2012-05-22 11:14:28 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
Reduced test case (compile with -m64 -O):
void bug6189(int half, int[2] pos, float[3] *pts, int unused)
{
pos[0] += half;
(*pts)[0] = pos[0];
(*pts)[1] = pos[1];
(*pts)[2] = half;
}
void main()
{
int[2] pos = [2,2];
float[3] pts = [0.0, 0.0, 0.0];
bug6189(0, pos, &pts, 0);
assert(pts[0] == 2);
}
This is working on latest dmd2 (42d8967) and d1 (4351a58), but the testcase in
comment 8 still fails on both.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 22 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
Leandro Lucarella <leandro.lucarella sociomantic.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |leandro.lucarella sociomant
| |ic.com
--- Comment #12 from Leandro Lucarella <leandro.lucarella sociomantic.com>
2012-05-22 11:17:37 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #10)
My reduction in comment 9 was valid only for D2, this one is valid for D1 as
well (again compile with -m64 -O):
---------------------------
struct IPoint {
int x, y;
}
void bug6189(uint half, IPoint pos, float[4] *pts, uint unused) {
pos.y += half;
float xo = pos.x;
float yo = pos.y;
(*pts)[0] = xo;
(*pts)[1] = yo;
(*pts)[2] = xo;
}
void main()
{
auto pos = IPoint(2, 2);
float[4] pts;
pts[0] = pts[1] = pts[2] = pts[3] = 0;
bug6189(0, pos, &pts, 0);
assert(pts[0] == 2);
}
OK, this one fails too in latest D1 and D2, but interestingly enough, it works
with -O -inline (in both D1 and D2)!
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 22 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189 --- Comment #13 from dawg dawgfoto.de 2012-05-22 12:00:35 PDT ---OK, this one fails too in latest D1 and D2, but interestingly enough, it works with -O -inline (in both D1 and D2)!This bug depends completely on register allocation and defies logic or intuitive understanding. I need to revisit my patch so it merges again. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 22 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189 --- Comment #14 from github-bugzilla puremagic.com 2012-05-22 23:42:39 PDT --- Commit pushed to dmd-1.x at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/69634f17f19663c100fd47392b25160c404843eb fix Issue 6189 - [64bit] optimizer: register content destroyed in function prolog -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 22 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189 --- Comment #15 from github-bugzilla puremagic.com 2012-05-22 23:42:50 PDT --- Commit pushed to master at https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/commit/41b1412aca8e8d9370d4479a1f52388c69685592 fix Issue 6189 - [64bit] optimizer: register content destroyed in function prolog -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 22 2012
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6189
Walter Bright <bugzilla digitalmars.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |RESOLVED
CC| |bugzilla digitalmars.com
Resolution| |FIXED
--- Comment #16 from Walter Bright <bugzilla digitalmars.com> 2012-05-22
23:44:34 PDT ---
I added an assert to detect if other cases of this show up.
--
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 22 2012