Moritz
I’m afraid I don’t understand any of this. Not your fault, but I just don’t have enough context to know what you mean.
Is there a current bug? If so, can you demonstrate it? If not, what is the problem you want to solve? Examples are always helpful.
Maybe it’s worth opening a ticket too?
Thanks!
Simon
From: ghc-devs On Behalf Of Moritz Angermann
Sent: 20 October 2020 02:51
To: ghc-devs
Subject: GHC's internal confusion about Ints and Words
Hi there!
So there is a procedure calling convention that for reasons I did not fully understand, but seem to be historically grown, uses packed arguments for those that are spilled onto the stack. On top of that, CInt is 32bit, Word is 64bits. This provides the following spectacle:
While we know in STG that the CInt is 32bits wide, when lowered into Cmm, it's represented as I64 in the arguments to the C function. Thus packing based on the format of the Cmm type would yield 8 bytes. And now, all further packed arguments have the wrong offset (by four).
Specifically in GHC.Cmm.Utils we find:
primRepCmmType :: Platform -> PrimRep -> CmmType
primRepCmmType platform IntRep = bWord platform
mkIntCLit :: Platform -> Int -> CmmLit
mkIntCLit platform i = CmmInt (toInteger i) (wordWidth platform)
The naive idea to just fix this and make them return cIntWidth instead, seemingly produces the correct Cmm expressions at a local level, but produces a broken compiler.
A second approach could be to extend the Hints into providing sizes, and using those during the foreign call generation to pack spilled arguments. This however appears to be more of a patching up of some fundamental underlying issue, instead of rectifying it properly.
Maybe I'll have to go down the Hint path, it does however break current Eq assumptions, as they are sized now, and what was equal before, is only equal now if they represent the same size.
From a cursory glance at the issues with naively fixing the width for Int, it seems that GHC internally assumes sizeof(Int) = sizeof(Word). Maybe there is a whole level of HsInt vs CInt discrimination missing?
Cheers,
Moritz
