#8326: Place heap checks common in case alternatives before the case -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Reporter: jstolarek | Owner: (none) Type: task | Status: new Priority: normal | Milestone: Component: Compiler | Version: 7.7 Resolution: | Keywords: CodeGen Operating System: Unknown/Multiple | Architecture: Type of failure: Runtime | Unknown/Multiple performance bug | Test Case: Blocked By: | Blocking: 8317 Related Tickets: #1498 | Differential Rev(s): Phab:D343 Wiki Page: | -------------------------------------+------------------------------------- Description changed by simonpj: Old description:
We would like to have functions that check whether an `Int#` is a valid tag to represent `Bool` (see Note [Optimizing isTrue#] in ghc-prim):
{{{ isTrue# :: Int# -> Bool isTrue# 1# = True isTrue# _ = False
isFalse# :: Int# -> Bool isFalse# 0# = True isFalse# _ = False }}}
We could use them with comparison primops like this:
{{{ f :: Int# -> Int f x | isTrue# (x ># 0#) = I# x | otherwise = -(I# x) }}}
`isTrue#` is optimized away at the Core level:
{{{ A.f = \ (x_aqM :: GHC.Prim.Int#) -> case GHC.Prim.># x_aqM 0 of _ { __DEFAULT -> GHC.Types.I# (GHC.Prim.negateInt# x_aqM); 1 -> GHC.Types.I# x_aqM } }}}
but the code genrator produces very bad Cmm code, because it pushes heap checks into case alternatives:
{{{ {offset cFd: // stack check if ((Sp + -16) < SpLim) goto cFr; else goto cFs; cFr: // not enough place on the stack, call GC R2 = R2; R1 = A.f_closure; call (stg_gc_fun)(R2, R1) args: 8, res: 0, upd: 8; cFs: // scrutinize (x ># 0#) _sEU::I64 = R2; _sEV::I64 = %MO_S_Gt_W64(R2, 0); if (_sEV::I64 != 1) goto cFg; else goto cFo; cFg: // False branch Hp = Hp + 16; if (Hp > HpLim) goto cFy; else goto cFx; cFy: // not enough heap, call GC HpAlloc = 16; I64[Sp - 16] = cFf; R1 = _sEV::I64; I64[Sp - 8] = _sEU::I64; Sp = Sp - 16; call stg_gc_unbx_r1(R1) returns to cFf, args: 8, res: 8, upd: 8; cFf: // re-do the False branch _sEU::I64 = I64[Sp + 8]; Sp = Sp + 16; _sEV::I64 = R1; goto cFg; cFx: // RHS of False branch I64[Hp - 8] = GHC.Types.I#_con_info; I64[Hp] = -_sEU::I64; R1 = Hp - 7; call (P64[Sp])(R1) args: 8, res: 0, upd: 8; cFo: // True branch Hp = Hp + 16; if (Hp > HpLim) goto cFv; else goto cFu; cFv: // not enough heap, call GC HpAlloc = 16; I64[Sp - 16] = cFn; R1 = _sEV::I64; I64[Sp - 8] = _sEU::I64; Sp = Sp - 16; call stg_gc_unbx_r1(R1) returns to cFn, args: 8, res: 8, upd: 8; cFn: // re-do the True branch _sEU::I64 = I64[Sp + 8]; Sp = Sp + 16; _sEV::I64 = R1; goto cFo; cFu: // RHS of True branch I64[Hp - 8] = GHC.Types.I#_con_info; I64[Hp] = _sEU::I64; R1 = Hp - 7; call (P64[Sp])(R1) args: 8, res: 0, upd: 8; } }}}
This results in average 2.5% increase in binary size. By contrast, if we use `tagToEnum#` instead of `isTrue#` heap check will be placed before `case` expression and the code will be significantly shorter (this is done by a special case-on-bool optimization in the code generator - see #8317). What we would like to do here is:
1. compile case alternatives without placing heap checks inside them 2. each compiled alternative should return amount of heap it needs to allocate 3. code generator inspects amounts of heap needed by each alternative and either adds heap checks in alternatives or puts a single check before the case expression.
Getting this right might be a bit tricky. 1. if all branches allocate some heap then we can just put a common heap check before the case. Note that we must allocate the higgest amount required by any of the alternatives and then alternatives that use less heap must retract the heap pointer accordingly. 2. if we have two alternatives, one of which allocates heap and the other does not, we should place the heap check only in the alternative that allocates the stack. This will solve #1498. 3. it is not clear to me what to do if we have combination of the above (more than one branch that allocates heap and at least one branch that does not). If we place heap check before the `case` expression we lose optimization of recursive functions and face the problem described in #1498. If we push heap checks into branches that allocate heap then we get code duplication, i.e. the problem that we're addressing in this ticket. I guess the only way to make correct decission here is to try different aproaches and measure their performance.
This ticket is mentioned [http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/PrimBool#Implementationdetails on this wiki page] and in the source code in Note [Optimizing isTrue#] in ghc-prim. Once this ticket is resolved we need to update these places accordingly.
New description: We would like to have functions that check whether an `Int#` is a valid tag to represent `Bool` (see Note [Optimizing isTrue#] in ghc-prim): {{{ isTrue# :: Int# -> Bool isTrue# 1# = True isTrue# _ = False isFalse# :: Int# -> Bool isFalse# 0# = True isFalse# _ = False }}} We could use them with comparison primops like this: {{{ f :: Int# -> Int f x | isTrue# (x ># 0#) = I# x | otherwise = -(I# x) }}} `isTrue#` is optimized away at the Core level: {{{ A.f = \ (x_aqM :: GHC.Prim.Int#) -> case GHC.Prim.># x_aqM 0 of _ { __DEFAULT -> GHC.Types.I# (GHC.Prim.negateInt# x_aqM); 1 -> GHC.Types.I# x_aqM } }}} but the code genrator produces very bad Cmm code, because it pushes heap checks into case alternatives: {{{ {offset cFd: // stack check if ((Sp + -16) < SpLim) goto cFr; else goto cFs; cFr: // not enough place on the stack, call GC R2 = R2; R1 = A.f_closure; call (stg_gc_fun)(R2, R1) args: 8, res: 0, upd: 8; cFs: // scrutinize (x ># 0#) _sEU::I64 = R2; _sEV::I64 = %MO_S_Gt_W64(R2, 0); if (_sEV::I64 != 1) goto cFg; else goto cFo; cFg: // False branch Hp = Hp + 16; if (Hp > HpLim) goto cFy; else goto cFx; cFy: // not enough heap, call GC HpAlloc = 16; I64[Sp - 16] = cFf; R1 = _sEV::I64; I64[Sp - 8] = _sEU::I64; Sp = Sp - 16; call stg_gc_unbx_r1(R1) returns to cFf, args: 8, res: 8, upd: 8; cFf: // re-do the False branch _sEU::I64 = I64[Sp + 8]; Sp = Sp + 16; _sEV::I64 = R1; goto cFg; cFx: // RHS of False branch I64[Hp - 8] = GHC.Types.I#_con_info; I64[Hp] = -_sEU::I64; R1 = Hp - 7; call (P64[Sp])(R1) args: 8, res: 0, upd: 8; cFo: // True branch Hp = Hp + 16; if (Hp > HpLim) goto cFv; else goto cFu; cFv: // not enough heap, call GC HpAlloc = 16; I64[Sp - 16] = cFn; R1 = _sEV::I64; I64[Sp - 8] = _sEU::I64; Sp = Sp - 16; call stg_gc_unbx_r1(R1) returns to cFn, args: 8, res: 8, upd: 8; cFn: // re-do the True branch _sEU::I64 = I64[Sp + 8]; Sp = Sp + 16; _sEV::I64 = R1; goto cFo; cFu: // RHS of True branch I64[Hp - 8] = GHC.Types.I#_con_info; I64[Hp] = _sEU::I64; R1 = Hp - 7; call (P64[Sp])(R1) args: 8, res: 0, upd: 8; } }}} This results in average 2.5% increase in binary size. By contrast, if we use `tagToEnum#` instead of `isTrue#` heap check will be placed before `case` expression and the code will be significantly shorter (this is done by a special case-on-bool optimization in the code generator - see #8317). What we would like to do here is: 1. compile case alternatives without placing heap checks inside them 2. each compiled alternative should return amount of heap it needs to allocate 3. code generator inspects amounts of heap needed by each alternative and either adds heap checks in alternatives or puts a single check before the case expression. Getting this right might be a bit tricky. 1. if all branches allocate some heap then we can just put a common heap check before the case. Note that we must allocate the higgest amount required by any of the alternatives and then alternatives that use less heap must retract the heap pointer accordingly. 2. if we have two alternatives, one of which allocates heap and the other does not, we should place the heap check only in the alternative that allocates the stack. This will solve #1498. 3. it is not clear to me what to do if we have combination of the above (more than one branch that allocates heap and at least one branch that does not). If we place heap check before the `case` expression we lose optimization of recursive functions and face the problem described in #1498. If we push heap checks into branches that allocate heap then we get code duplication, i.e. the problem that we're addressing in this ticket. I guess the only way to make correct decission here is to try different aproaches and measure their performance. This ticket is mentioned * [http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/wiki/PrimBool#Implementationdetails on this wiki page] * in the source code in Note [Optimizing isTrue#] in ghc-prim. * In `Simplify.hs`, `Note [Optimising tagToEnum#]` Once this ticket is resolved we need to update these places accordingly. -- -- Ticket URL: http://ghc.haskell.org/trac/ghc/ticket/8326#comment:46 GHC http://www.haskell.org/ghc/ The Glasgow Haskell Compiler