[*64] Allow more fastTailCalls involving structs #3
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Before this change structs on Arm64 and Amd64 Unix could pessimize when we could fastTailCall if they were engregisterable and took more than one register. This updates the canFastTailCall function to allow this pattern to be fastTailCalled.
CarolEidt
reviewed
Jun 5, 2017
| LclVarDsc* varDsc = varDscInfo.varDsc; | ||
| CORINFO_ARG_LIST_HANDLE localsSig = info.compMethodInfo->locals.args; | ||
| unsigned argRegNum = varDscInfo.intRegArgNum; | ||
| unsigned otherArgRegNum = varDscInfo.floatRegArgNum; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is confusing at best, and needs a comment. I gather that this handles the case where there may be a mix of int and float regs, so that this is the first of each that is used for this arg?
CarolEidt
reviewed
Jun 5, 2017
| @@ -262,6 +264,9 @@ void Compiler::lvaInitTypeRef() | |||
| } | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| info.compArgRegCount = argRegNum; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This doesn't make sense to me. Why are you assigning a register number to a count?
CarolEidt
reviewed
Jun 5, 2017
| unsigned compILargsCount; // Number of arguments (incl. implicit but not hidden) | ||
| unsigned compArgsCount; // Number of arguments (incl. implicit and hidden) | ||
| unsigned compArgRegCount; // Number of integer locals | ||
| unsigned compOtherArgRegCount; // Number of multireg args |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These should be ifdef'd under FEATURE_MULTIREG_ARGS. Also, is it the number of integer locals or the number of integer arguments in registers?
jashook
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 1, 2017
# This is the 1st commit message: Remove CoreFX runtest dependency This change will start using build-test.sh generatelayoutonly to build the coreoverlay directory for use with runtest.sh. # This is the commit message #2: Missing ./ # This is the commit message #3: Fix untar location # This is the commit message #4: Use portable builds # This is the commit message #5: Get ci green # This is the commit message #6: Small changes # This is the commit message #7: Small changes # This is the commit message #8: Small changes # This is the commit message #9: Add generateonly builds.sh # This is the commit message #10: Ensure correct test location # This is the commit message #11: netci change # This is the commit message #12: netci change # This is the commit message #13: Working on setting up build-test # This is the commit message #14: Remove generatelayoutonly # This is the commit message #15: Undo some of the changes to use generatelayoutonly # This is the commit message #16: Correctly remove build-test.sh invocation # This is the commit message #17: Fix build-test generatelayoutonly # This is the commit message #18: Fix a few netci issues
jashook
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 6, 2018
1. Computing GC roots is a relatively slow operation, and doing it for every state machine object found in a large heap can be time consuming. Making it opt-in with -roots command-line flag.
2. Added -waiting command-line flag. DumpAsync will now retrieve the <>1__state field from the StateMachine, and if -waiting is specified, it'll filter down to state machines that have a state value >= 0, meaning the state machines are waiting at an await point. For example, given this program:
```C#
using System.Threading.Tasks;
class Program
{
static async Task Main() { await MethodA(0); await MethodA(int.MaxValue); }
static async Task MethodA(int delay) => await MethodB(delay);
static async Task MethodB(int delay) { await Task.Yield(); await Task.Delay(delay); }
}
```
using `!DumpAsync` outputs:
```
Address MT Size Name
#0
0000026848693438 00007ff88ea35e58 120 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<MethodB>d__2, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<MethodB>d__2 (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000008 0 System.Int32 1 instance -2 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd82f8 4000009 8 ...TaskMethodBuilder 1 instance 0000026848693490 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 400000a 4 System.Int32 1 instance 0 delay
00007ff8e9bee4d0 400000b 10 ...able+YieldAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848693498 <>u__1
00007ff8e9bcead0 400000c 18 ...vices.TaskAwaiter 1 instance 00000268486934a0 <>u__2
Continuation: 00000268486934b0 (System.Object)
#1
0000026848693e68 00007ff88ea36cc8 112 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<MethodA>d__1, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<MethodA>d__1 (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000004 0 System.Int32 1 instance -2 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd82f8 4000005 8 ...TaskMethodBuilder 1 instance 0000026848693ec0 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000006 4 System.Int32 1 instance 0 delay
00007ff8e9bcead0 4000007 10 ...vices.TaskAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848693ec8 <>u__1
Continuation: 00000268486934b0 (System.Object)
#2
0000026848693ed8 00007ff88ea37188 112 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<Main>d__0, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<Main>d__0 (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000001 0 System.Int32 1 instance 1 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd82f8 4000002 8 ...TaskMethodBuilder 1 instance 0000026848693f30 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bcead0 4000003 10 ...vices.TaskAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848693f38 <>u__1
Continuation: 0000026848693f48 (System.Threading.Tasks.Task+SetOnInvokeMres)
#3
0000026848695d30 00007ff88ea35e58 120 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<MethodB>d__2, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<MethodB>d__2 (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000008 0 System.Int32 1 instance 1 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd82f8 4000009 8 ...TaskMethodBuilder 1 instance 0000026848695d88 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 400000a 4 System.Int32 1 instance 2147483647 delay
00007ff8e9bee4d0 400000b 10 ...able+YieldAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848695d90 <>u__1
00007ff8e9bcead0 400000c 18 ...vices.TaskAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848695d98 <>u__2
Continuation: 0000026848695dd0 (System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<MethodA>d__1, test]])
#4
0000026848695dd0 00007ff88ea36cc8 112 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<MethodA>d__1, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<MethodA>d__1 (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000004 0 System.Int32 1 instance 0 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd82f8 4000005 8 ...TaskMethodBuilder 1 instance 0000026848695e28 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000006 4 System.Int32 1 instance 2147483647 delay
00007ff8e9bcead0 4000007 10 ...vices.TaskAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848695e30 <>u__1
Continuation: 0000026848693ed8 (System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<Main>d__0, test]])
Found 5 state machines.
```
while using `!DumpAsync -waiting` outputs only:
```
Address MT Size Name
#0
0000026848693ed8 00007ff88ea37188 112 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<Main>d__0, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<Main>d__0 (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000001 0 System.Int32 1 instance 1 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd82f8 4000002 8 ...TaskMethodBuilder 1 instance 0000026848693f30 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bcead0 4000003 10 ...vices.TaskAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848693f38 <>u__1
Continuation: 0000026848693f48 (System.Threading.Tasks.Task+SetOnInvokeMres)
#1
0000026848695d30 00007ff88ea35e58 120 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<MethodB>d__2, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<MethodB>d__2 (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000008 0 System.Int32 1 instance 1 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd82f8 4000009 8 ...TaskMethodBuilder 1 instance 0000026848695d88 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 400000a 4 System.Int32 1 instance 2147483647 delay
00007ff8e9bee4d0 400000b 10 ...able+YieldAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848695d90 <>u__1
00007ff8e9bcead0 400000c 18 ...vices.TaskAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848695d98 <>u__2
Continuation: 0000026848695dd0 (System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<MethodA>d__1, test]])
#2
0000026848695dd0 00007ff88ea36cc8 112 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<MethodA>d__1, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<MethodA>d__1 (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000004 0 System.Int32 1 instance 0 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd82f8 4000005 8 ...TaskMethodBuilder 1 instance 0000026848695e28 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000006 4 System.Int32 1 instance 2147483647 delay
00007ff8e9bcead0 4000007 10 ...vices.TaskAwaiter 1 instance 0000026848695e30 <>u__1
Continuation: 0000026848693ed8 (System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Threading.Tasks.VoidTaskResult, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<Main>d__0, test]])
Found 3 state machines.
```
skipping the two state machines that have a `<>1__state` field value of -2 (meaning it's completed). Note that this change has the somewhat unfortunate impact of taking a dependency on what's effectively an implementation detail of Roslyn, but the value the filtering provides is deemed to be worth it. This design is unlikely to change in the future, and as with other diagnostic/debugging features that rely on such details, it can be updated if Roslyn ever changes its scheme. In the meantime, the code will output a warning message if it can't find the state field.
3. If a state machine is found to have 0 roots but also to have a <>1__state value >= 0, that suggests it was dropped without having been completed, which is likely a sign of an application bug. The command now prints out an information message to highlight that state. For example, this program:
```C#
using System;
using System.Threading.Tasks;
class Program
{
static void Main()
{
Task.Run(async () => await new TaskCompletionSource<bool>().Task);
Console.ReadLine();
}
}
```
when processed with `!DumpAsync -roots` results in:
```
Address MT Size Name
#0
0000020787fb5b30 00007ff88ea1afe8 112 System.Runtime.CompilerServices.AsyncTaskMethodBuilder`1+AsyncStateMachineBox`1[[System.Boolean, System.Private.CoreLib],[Program+<>c+<<Main>b__0_0>d, test]]
StateMachine: Program+<>c+<<Main>b__0_0>d (struct)
MT Field Offset Type VT Attr Value Name
00007ff8e9bc4bc0 4000003 0 System.Int32 1 instance 0 <>1__state
00007ff8e9bd0b88 4000004 8 ...Private.CoreLib]] 1 instance 0000020787fb5b88 <>t__builder
00007ff8e9bffd58 4000005 10 ...Private.CoreLib]] 1 instance 0000020787fb5b90 <>u__1
Continuation: 0000020787fb3fc8 (System.Threading.Tasks.UnwrapPromise`1[[System.Boolean, System.Private.CoreLib]])
GC roots:
Incomplete state machine (<>1__state == 0) with 0 roots.
Found 1 state machines.
```
jashook
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 1, 2019
* find src/jit -type f -exec sed -i -e 's/gtLclVarCommon\./AsLclVarCommon()\./g' {} \;
gtLclVarCommon
* Format patch
* Format patch
* Format patch #3
* Remove redundant /
jashook
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 13, 2019
This change contains the remaining fixes I made while digging through the PR run in the runtime repo: 1) Some more repo-relative vs. coreclr-relative repo adjustments reflecting the migration process; 2) Make sure that XunitTestBinBase always ends with a directory separator, otherwise my recent fix for Common folder exclusion doesn't work; 3) Opportunistically shorten project names of two native interop test components - as the project name is repeated about 3-4 times in some intermediate paths, it quickly exceeds the standard Windows path length limit. Please note there's no functional change in the test. Thanks Tomas
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Before this change structs on Arm64 and Amd64 Unix could
pessimize when we could fastTailCall if they were engregisterable
and took more than one register.
This updates the canFastTailCall function to allow this pattern
to be fastTailCalled.