Suggested by mdempsky in CL 38232.
This allows us to use the Frontend field
to associate frontend state and information
with a function.
See the following CL in the series for examples.
This is a giant CL, but it is almost entirely routine refactoring.
The ssa test API is starting to feel a bit unwieldy.
I will clean it up separately, once the dust has settled.
Passes toolstash -cmp.
Updates #15756
Change-Id: I71c573bd96ff7251935fce1391b06b1f133c3caf
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/38327
Run-TryBot: Josh Bleecher Snyder <josharian@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
When we discover a relation x <= len(s), also discover the relation
x <= cap(s). That way, in situations like:
a := s[x:] // tests 0 <= x <= len(s)
b := s[:x] // tests 0 <= x <= cap(s)
the second check can be eliminated.
Fixes#16813
Change-Id: Ifc037920b6955e43bac1a1eaf6bac63a89cfbd44
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/33633
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandru Moșoi <alexandru@mosoi.ro>
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
This is a mostly mechanical rename followed by manual fixes where necessary.
Change-Id: Ie5c670b133db978f15dc03e50dc2da0c80fc8842
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/34137
Reviewed-by: David Lazar <lazard@golang.org>
When we do
var x []byte = ...
y := x[i:]
We can't just use y.ptr = x.ptr + i, as the new pointer may point to the
next object in memory after the backing array.
We used to fix this by doing:
y.cap = x.cap - i
delta := i
if y.cap == 0 {
delta = 0
}
y.ptr = x.ptr + delta
That generates a branch in what is otherwise straight-line code.
Better to do:
y.cap = x.cap - i
mask := (y.cap - 1) >> 63 // -1 if y.cap==0, 0 otherwise
y.ptr = x.ptr + i &^ mask
It's about the same number of instructions (~4, depending on what
parts are constant, and the target architecture), but it is all
inline. It plays nicely with CSE, and the mask can be computed
in parallel with the index (in cases where a multiply is required).
It is a minor win in both speed and space.
Change-Id: Ied60465a0b8abb683c02208402e5bb7ac0e8370f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/32022
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
Adapt old test for prove's bounds check elimination.
Added missing rule to generic rules that lead to differences
between 32 and 64 bit platforms on sliceopt test.
Added debugging to prove.go that was helpful-to-necessary to
discover that missing rule.
Lowered debugging level on prove.go from 3 to 1; no idea
why it was previously 3.
Change-Id: I09de206aeb2fced9f2796efe2bfd4a59927eda0c
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/23290
Run-TryBot: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
We compute a lot of stuff based off the CFG: postorder traversal,
dominators, dominator tree, loop nest. Multiple phases use this
information and we end up recomputing some of it. Add a cache
for this information so if the CFG hasn't changed, we can reuse
the previous computation.
Change-Id: I9b5b58af06830bd120afbee9cfab395a0a2f74b2
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/29356
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
This adds a sparse method for locating nearest ancestors
in a dominator tree, and checks blocks with more than one
predecessor for differences and inserts phi functions where
there are.
Uses reversed post order to cut number of passes, running
it from first def to last use ("last use" for paramout and
mem is end-of-program; last use for a phi input from a
backedge is the source of the back edge)
Includes a cutover from old algorithm to new to avoid paying
large constant factor for small programs. This keeps normal
builds running at about the same time, while not running
over-long on large machine-generated inputs.
Add "phase" flags for ssa/build -- ssa/build/stats prints
number of blocks, values (before and after linking references
and inserting phis, so expansion can be measured), and their
product; the product governs the cutover, where a good value
seems to be somewhere between 1 and 5 million.
Among the files compiled by make.bash, this is the shape of
the tail of the distribution for #blocks, #vars, and their
product:
#blocks #vars product
max 6171 28180 173,898,780
99.9% 1641 6548 10,401,878
99% 463 1909 873,721
95% 152 639 95,235
90% 84 359 30,021
The old algorithm is indeed usually fastest, for 99%ile
values of usually.
The fix to LookupVarOutgoing
( https://go-review.googlesource.com/#/c/22790/ )
deals with some of the same problems addressed by this CL,
but on at least one bug ( #15537 ) this change is still
a significant help.
With this CL:
/tmp/gopath$ rm -rf pkg bin
/tmp/gopath$ time go get -v -gcflags -memprofile=y.mprof \
github.com/gogo/protobuf/test/theproto3/combos/...
...
real 4m35.200s
user 13m16.644s
sys 0m36.712s
and pprof reports 3.4GB allocated in one of the larger profiles
With tip:
/tmp/gopath$ rm -rf pkg bin
/tmp/gopath$ time go get -v -gcflags -memprofile=y.mprof \
github.com/gogo/protobuf/test/theproto3/combos/...
...
real 10m36.569s
user 25m52.286s
sys 4m3.696s
and pprof reports 8.3GB allocated in the same larger profile
With this CL, most of the compilation time on the benchmarked
input is spent in register/stack allocation (cumulative 53%)
and in the sparse lookup algorithm itself (cumulative 20%).
Fixes#15537.
Change-Id: Ia0299dda6a291534d8b08e5f9883216ded677a00
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/22342
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom <eric@engestrom.ch>
Change-Id: I91873aaebf79bdf1c00d38aacc1a1fb8d79656a7
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/21433
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Handle this case:
if 0 <= i && i < len(a) {
use a[i]
}
Shaves about 5k from pkg/tools/linux_amd64/*.
Change-Id: I6675ff49aa306b0d241b074c5738e448204cd981
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/21431
Run-TryBot: Alexandru Moșoi <alexandru@mosoi.ro>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Find comparisons to constants and propagate that information
down the dominator tree. Use it to resolve other constant
comparisons on the same variable.
So if we know x >= 7, then a x > 4 condition must return true.
This change allows us to use "_ = b[7]" hints to eliminate bounds checks.
Fixes#14900
Change-Id: Idbf230bd5b7da43de3ecb48706e21cf01bf812f7
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/21008
Reviewed-by: Alexandru Moșoi <alexandru@mosoi.ro>
Keep track of how many uses each Value has. Each appearance in
Value.Args and in Block.Control counts once.
The number of uses of a value is generically useful to
constrain rewrite rules. For instance, we might want to
prevent merging index operations into loads if the same
index expression is used lots of times.
But I have one use in particular for which the use count is required.
We must make sure we don't combine ops with loads if the load has
more than one use. Otherwise, we may split a single load
into multiple loads and that breaks perceived behavior in
the presence of races. In particular, the load of m.state
in sync/mutex.go:Lock can't be done twice. (I have a separate
CL which triggers the mutex failure. This CL has a test which
demonstrates a similar failure.)
Change-Id: Icaafa479239f48632a069d0c3f624e6ebc6b1f0e
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/20790
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Todd Neal <todd@tneal.org>
Line numbers are always int32, so the Warnl function should take the
line number as an int32 as well. This matches gc.Warnl and removes
a cast every place it's used.
Change-Id: I5d6201e640d52ec390eb7174f8fd8c438d4efe58
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/20662
Run-TryBot: Todd Neal <todd@tneal.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
* Refacts a bit saving and restoring parents restrictions
* Shaves ~100k from pkg/tools/linux_amd64,
but most of the savings come from the rewrite rules.
* Improves on the following artificial test case:
func f1(a4 bool, a6 bool) bool {
return a6 || (a6 || (a6 || a4)) || (a6 || (a4 || a6 || (false || a6)))
}
Change-Id: I714000f75a37a3a6617c6e6834c75bd23674215f
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/20306
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Alexandru Moșoi <alexandru@mosoi.ro>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Exposed data already in sdom to avoid recreating it in prove.
Change-Id: I834c9c03ed8faeaee013e5a1b3f955908f0e0915
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/19999
Run-TryBot: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Alexandru Moșoi <alexandru@mosoi.ro>
* It does very simple bounds checking elimination. E.g.
removes the second check in for i := range a { a[i]++; a[i++]; }
* Improves on the following redundant expression:
return a6 || (a6 || (a6 || a4)) || (a6 || (a4 || a6 || (false || a6)))
* Linear in the number of block edges.
I patched in CL 12960 that does bounds, nil and constant propagation
to make sure this CL is not just redundant. Size of pkg/tool/linux_amd64/*
(excluding compile which is affected by this change):
With IsInBounds and IsSliceInBounds
-this -12960 92285080
+this -12960 91947416
-this +12960 91978976
+this +12960 91923088
Gain is ~110% of 12960.
Without IsInBounds and IsSliceInBounds (older run)
-this -12960 95515512
+this -12960 95492536
-this +12960 95216920
+this +12960 95204440
Shaves 22k on its own.
* Can we handle IsInBounds better with this? In
for i := range a { a[i]++; } the bounds checking at a[i]
is not eliminated.
Change-Id: I98957427399145fb33693173fd4d5a8d71c7cc20
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/19710
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Alexandru Moșoi <alexandru@mosoi.ro>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
