When a subsequent load/store of a ptr makes the nil check of that pointer
unnecessary, if their lines differ, change the line of the load/store
to that of the nilcheck, and attempt to rehome the load/store position
instead.
This fix makes profiling less accurate in order to make panics more
informative.
Fixes#33724
Change-Id: Ib9afaac12fe0d0320aea1bf493617facc34034b3
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/200197
Run-TryBot: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
For commuting ops, check whether the second argument is dead before
checking if the first argument is rematerializeable. Reusing the register
holding a dead value is always best.
Fixes#33580
Change-Id: I7372cfc03d514e6774d2d9cc727a3e6bf6ce2657
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/199559
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
Add a bunch of extra tests and benchmarks for defer, in preparation for new
low-cost (open-coded) implementation of defers (see #34481),
- New file defer_test.go that tests a bunch more unusual defer scenarios,
including things that might have problems for open-coded defers.
- Additions to callers_test.go actually verifying what the stack trace looks like
for various panic or panic-recover scenarios.
- Additions to crash_test.go testing several more crash scenarios involving
recursive panics.
- New benchmark in runtime_test.go measuring speed of panic-recover
- New CGo benchmark in cgo_test.go calling from Go to C back to Go that
shows defer overhead
Updates #34481
Change-Id: I423523f3e05fc0229d4277dd00073289a5526188
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/197017
Run-TryBot: Dan Scales <danscales@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Austin Clements <austin@google.com>
On modern 64bit CPUs a SHR, SHL or AND instruction take 1 cycle to execute.
A pair of shifts that operate on the same register will take 2 cycles
and needs to wait for the input register value to be available.
Large constants used to mask the high bits of a register with an AND
instruction can not be encoded as an immediate in the AND instruction
on amd64 and therefore need to be loaded into a register with a MOV
instruction.
However that MOV instruction is not dependent on the output register and
on many CPUs does not compete with the AND or shift instructions for
execution ports.
Using a pair of shifts to mask high bits instead of an AND to mask high
bits of a register has a shorter encoding and uses one less general
purpose register but is slower due to taking one clock cycle longer
if there is no register pressure that would make the AND variant need to
generate a spill.
For example the instructions emitted for (x & 1 << 63) before this CL are:
48c1ea3f SHRQ $0x3f, DX
48c1e23f SHLQ $0x3f, DX
after this CL the instructions are the same as GCC and LLVM use:
48b80000000000000080 MOVQ $0x8000000000000000, AX
4821d0 ANDQ DX, AX
Some platforms such as arm64 already have SSA optimization rules to fuse
two shift instructions back into an AND.
Removing the general rule to rewrite AND to SHR+SHL speeds up this benchmark:
var GlobalU uint
func BenchmarkAndHighBits(b *testing.B) {
x := uint(0)
for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
x &= 1 << 63
}
GlobalU = x
}
amd64/darwin on Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3520M CPU @ 2.90GHz:
name old time/op new time/op delta
AndHighBits-4 0.61ns ± 6% 0.42ns ± 6% -31.42% (p=0.000 n=25+25):
'go run run.go -all_codegen -v codegen' passes with following adjustments:
ARM64: The BFXIL pattern ((x << lc) >> rc | y & ac) needed adjustment
since ORshiftRL generation fusing '>> rc' and '|' interferes
with matching ((x << lc) >> rc) to generate UBFX. Previously
ORshiftLL was created first using the shifts generated for (y & ac).
S390X: Add rules for abs and copysign to match use of AND instead of SHIFTs.
Updates #33826
Updates #32781
Change-Id: I5a59f6239660d53c029cd22dfb44ddf39f93a56c
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/196810
Run-TryBot: Martin Möhrmann <moehrmann@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
On modern 64bit CPUs a SHR, SHL or AND instruction take 1 cycle to execute.
A pair of shifts that operate on the same register will take 2 cycles
and needs to wait for the input register value to be available.
Large constants used to mask the high bits of a register with an AND
instruction can not be encoded as an immediate in the AND instruction
on amd64 and therefore need to be loaded into a register with a MOV
instruction.
However that MOV instruction is not dependent on the output register and
on many CPUs does not compete with the AND or shift instructions for
execution ports.
Using a pair of shifts to mask high bits instead of an AND to mask high
bits of a register has a shorter encoding and uses one less general
purpose register but is slower due to taking one clock cycle longer
if there is no register pressure that would make the AND variant need to
generate a spill.
For example the instructions emitted for (x & 1 << 63) before this CL are:
48c1ea3f SHRQ $0x3f, DX
48c1e23f SHLQ $0x3f, DX
after this CL the instructions are the same as GCC and LLVM use:
48b80000000000000080 MOVQ $0x8000000000000000, AX
4821d0 ANDQ DX, AX
Some platforms such as arm64 already have SSA optimization rules to fuse
two shift instructions back into an AND.
Removing the general rule to rewrite AND to SHR+SHL speeds up this benchmark:
var GlobalU uint
func BenchmarkAndHighBits(b *testing.B) {
x := uint(0)
for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
x &= 1 << 63
}
GlobalU = x
}
amd64/darwin on Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3520M CPU @ 2.90GHz:
name old time/op new time/op delta
AndHighBits-4 0.61ns ± 6% 0.42ns ± 6% -31.42% (p=0.000 n=25+25):
'go run run.go -all_codegen -v codegen' passes with following adjustments:
ARM64: The BFXIL pattern ((x << lc) >> rc | y & ac) needed adjustment
since ORshiftRL generation fusing '>> rc' and '|' interferes
with matching ((x << lc) >> rc) to generate UBFX. Previously
ORshiftLL was created first using the shifts generated for (y & ac).
S390X: Add rules for abs and copysign to match use of AND instead of SHIFTs.
Updates #33826
Updates #32781
Change-Id: I43227da76b625de03fbc51117162b23b9c678cdb
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/194297
Run-TryBot: Martin Möhrmann <martisch@uos.de>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
i32.eqz instructions don't appear unless needed in if conditions anymore
after CL 195204. I forgot to run the codegen tests while submitting the CL.
Thanks to @martisch for catching it.
Fixes#34442
Change-Id: I177b064b389be48e39d564849714d7a8839be13e
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/196580
Run-TryBot: Agniva De Sarker <agniva.quicksilver@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin Möhrmann <moehrmann@google.com>
When compiling expression switches, we try to optimize runs of
constants into binary searches. The ordering used isn't visible to the
application, so it's unimportant as long as we're consistent between
sorting and searching.
For strings, it's much cheaper to compare string lengths than strings
themselves, so instead of ordering strings by "si <= sj", we currently
order them by "len(si) < len(sj) || len(si) == len(sj) && si <= sj"
(i.e., the lexicographical ordering on the 2-tuple (len(s), s)).
However, it's also somewhat cheaper to compare strings for equality
(i.e., ==) than for ordering (i.e., <=). And if there were two or
three string constants of the same length in a switch statement, we
might unnecessarily emit ordering comparisons.
For example, given:
switch s {
case "", "1", "2", "3": // ordered by length then content
goto L
}
we currently compile this as:
if len(s) < 1 || len(s) == 1 && s <= "1" {
if s == "" { goto L }
else if s == "1" { goto L }
} else {
if s == "2" { goto L }
else if s == "3" { goto L }
}
This CL switches to using a 2-level binary search---first on len(s),
then on s itself---so that string ordering comparisons are only needed
when there are 4 or more strings of the same length. (4 being the
cut-off for when using binary search is actually worthwhile.)
So the above switch instead now compiles to:
if len(s) == 0 {
if s == "" { goto L }
} else if len(s) == 1 {
if s == "1" { goto L }
else if s == "2" { goto L }
else if s == "3" { goto L }
}
which is better optimized by walk and SSA. (Notably, because there are
only two distinct lengths and no more than three strings of any
particular length, this example ends up falling back to simply using
linear search.)
Test case by khr@ from CL 195138.
Fixes#33934.
Change-Id: I8eeebcaf7e26343223be5f443d6a97a0daf84f07
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/195340
Run-TryBot: Matthew Dempsky <mdempsky@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
golang.org/cl/109517 optimized the compiler to avoid the allocation for make in
append(x, make([]T, y)...). This was only implemented for the case that y has type int.
This change extends the optimization to trigger for all integer types where the value
is known at compile time to fit into an int.
name old time/op new time/op delta
ExtendInt-12 106ns ± 4% 106ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.351 n=10+6)
ExtendUint64-12 1.03µs ± 5% 0.10µs ± 4% -90.01% (p=0.000 n=9+10)
name old alloc/op new alloc/op delta
ExtendInt-12 0.00B 0.00B ~ (all equal)
ExtendUint64-12 13.6kB ± 0% 0.0kB -100.00% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
name old allocs/op new allocs/op delta
ExtendInt-12 0.00 0.00 ~ (all equal)
ExtendUint64-12 1.00 ± 0% 0.00 -100.00% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
Updates #29785
Change-Id: Ief7760097c285abd591712da98c5b02bc3961fcd
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/182559
Run-TryBot: Cuong Manh Le <cuong.manhle.vn@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
This reverts CL 192101.
Reason for revert: The same paragraph was added 2 weeks ago
(look a few lines above)
Change-Id: I05efb2631d7b4966f66493f178f2a649c715a3cc
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/195637
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
It is useful to know about the -all_codegen option for running
codegen tests for all platforms. I was puzzling that some codegen
test was not failing on my local machine or on trybot, until I
found this option.
Change-Id: I062cf4d73f6a6c9ebc2258195779d2dab21bc36d
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/192101
Reviewed-by: Daniel Martí <mvdan@mvdan.cc>
Run-TryBot: Daniel Martí <mvdan@mvdan.cc>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
This change adds an intrinsic for Mul64 on s390x. To achieve that,
a new assembly instruction, MLGR, is introduced in s390x/asmz.go. This assembly
instruction directly uses an existing instruction on Z and supports multiplication
of two 64 bit unsigned integer and stores the result in two separate registers.
In this case, we require the multiplcand to be stored in register R3 and
the output result (the high and low 64 bit of the product) to be stored in
R2 and R3 respectively.
A test case is also added.
Benchmark:
name old time/op new time/op delta
Mul-18 11.1ns ± 0% 1.4ns ± 0% -87.39% (p=0.002 n=8+10)
Mul32-18 2.07ns ± 0% 2.07ns ± 0% ~ (all equal)
Mul64-18 11.1ns ± 1% 1.4ns ± 0% -87.42% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
Change-Id: Ieca6ad1f61fff9a48a31d50bbd3f3c6d9e6675c1
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/194572
Reviewed-by: Michael Munday <mike.munday@ibm.com>
Run-TryBot: Michael Munday <mike.munday@ibm.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
This CL gets rid of the MOVDreg and MOVDnop SSA operations on
s390x. They were originally inserted to help avoid situations
where a sign/zero extension was elided but a spill invalidated
the optimization. It's not really clear we need to do this though
(amd64 doesn't have these ops for example) so long as we are
careful when removing sign/zero extensions. Also, the MOVDreg
technique doesn't work if the register is spilled before the
MOVDreg op (I haven't seen that in practice).
Removing these ops reduces the complexity of the rules and also
allows us to unblock optimizations. For example, the compiler can
now merge the loads in binary.{Big,Little}Endian.PutUint16 which
it wasn't able to do before. This CL reduces the size of the .text
section in the go tool by about 4.7KB (0.09%).
Change-Id: Icaddae7f2e4f9b2debb6fabae845adb3f73b41db
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/173897
Run-TryBot: Michael Munday <mike.munday@ibm.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
On modern 64bit CPUs a SHR, SHL or AND instruction take 1 cycle to execute.
A pair of shifts that operate on the same register will take 2 cycles
and needs to wait for the input register value to be available.
Large constants used to mask the high bits of a register with an AND
instruction can not be encoded as an immediate in the AND instruction
on amd64 and therefore need to be loaded into a register with a MOV
instruction.
However that MOV instruction is not dependent on the output register and
on many CPUs does not compete with the AND or shift instructions for
execution ports.
Using a pair of shifts to mask high bits instead of an AND to mask high
bits of a register has a shorter encoding and uses one less general
purpose register but is slower due to taking one clock cycle longer
if there is no register pressure that would make the AND variant need to
generate a spill.
For example the instructions emitted for (x & 1 << 63) before this CL are:
48c1ea3f SHRQ $0x3f, DX
48c1e23f SHLQ $0x3f, DX
after this CL the instructions are the same as GCC and LLVM use:
48b80000000000000080 MOVQ $0x8000000000000000, AX
4821d0 ANDQ DX, AX
Some platforms such as arm64 already have SSA optimization rules to fuse
two shift instructions back into an AND.
Removing the general rule to rewrite AND to SHR+SHL speeds up this benchmark:
var GlobalU uint
func BenchmarkAndHighBits(b *testing.B) {
x := uint(0)
for i := 0; i < b.N; i++ {
x &= 1 << 63
}
GlobalU = x
}
amd64/darwin on Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3520M CPU @ 2.90GHz:
name old time/op new time/op delta
AndHighBits-4 0.61ns ± 6% 0.42ns ± 6% -31.42% (p=0.000 n=25+25):
Updates #33826
Updates #32781
Change-Id: I862d3587446410c447b9a7265196b57f85358633
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/191780
Run-TryBot: Martin Möhrmann <moehrmann@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
For performance reasons (avoiding costly cross-compilations) CL 177577
changed the codegen test harness to only run the tests for the
machine's GOARCH by default.
This change updates the codegen README accordingly, explaining what
all.bash does run by default and how to perform the tests for all
architectures.
Fixes#33924
Change-Id: I43328d878c3e449ebfda46f7e69963a44a511d40
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/192619
Reviewed-by: Daniel Martí <mvdan@mvdan.cc>
This CL eliminates unnecessary pairs of I32WrapI64 and
I64ExtendI32U generated by the WASM backend for IF
statements. And it makes the total size of pkg/js_wasm/
decreases about 490KB.
Change-Id: I16b0abb686c4e30d5624323166ec2d0ec57dbe2d
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/191758
Run-TryBot: Ben Shi <powerman1st@163.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Richard Musiol <neelance@gmail.com>
This CL reverts CL 192097 and fixes the issue in CL 189277.
Change-Id: Icd271262e1f5019a8e01c91f91c12c1261eeb02b
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/192519
Run-TryBot: Ben Shi <powerman1st@163.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
The syntax of a shifted operation does not have a "$" sign for
the shift amount. Remove it.
Change-Id: I50782fe942b640076f48c2fafea4d3175be8ff99
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/192100
Run-TryBot: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Extend the optimization introduced in CL 141118 to the wasm architecture.
And for reference, the rules trigger 212 times while building std and cmd
$GOOS=js GOARCH=wasm gotip build std cmd
$grep -E "Wasm.rules:44(1|2|3|4)" rulelog | wc -l
212
Updates #26498
Change-Id: I153684a2b98589ae812b42268da08b65679e09d1
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/185477
Run-TryBot: Agniva De Sarker <agniva.quicksilver@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard Musiol <neelance@gmail.com>
Use the shiftIsBounded function to generate more efficient
Shift instructions.
Updates #25167
Change-Id: Id350f8462dc3a7ed3bfed0bcbea2860b8f40048a
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/182558
Run-TryBot: Agniva De Sarker <agniva.quicksilver@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Richard Musiol <neelance@gmail.com>
This CL optimizes math.bits.TrailingZeros16 on 386 with
a pair of BSFL and ORL instrcutions.
The case TrailingZeros16-4 of the benchmark test in
math/bits shows big improvement.
name old time/op new time/op delta
TrailingZeros16-4 1.55ns ± 1% 0.87ns ± 1% -43.87% (p=0.000 n=50+49)
Change-Id: Ia899975b0e46f45dcd20223b713ed632bc32740b
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/189277
Run-TryBot: Ben Shi <powerman1st@163.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
This CL performs the branchelim optimization on WASM with its
select instruction. And the total size of pkg/js_wasm decreased
about 80KB by this optimization.
Change-Id: I868eb146120a1cac5c4609c8e9ddb07e4da8a1d9
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/190957
Run-TryBot: Ben Shi <powerman1st@163.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Richard Musiol <neelance@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
The assembly output for x & c == c, where c is power of 2:
MOVQ "".set+8(SP), AX
ANDQ $8, AX
CMPQ AX, $8
SETEQ "".~r2+24(SP)
With optimization using bitset:
MOVQ "".set+8(SP), AX
BTL $3, AX
SETCS "".~r2+24(SP)
output less than 1 instruction.
However, there is no speed improvement:
name old time/op new time/op delta
AllBitSet-8 0.35ns ± 0% 0.35ns ± 0% ~ (all equal)
Fixes#31904
Change-Id: I5dca4e410bf45716ed2145e3473979ec997e35d4
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/175957
Run-TryBot: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
This reverts CL 180761
Reason for revert: Reinstate the stack-allocated defer CL.
There was nothing wrong with the CL proper, but stack allocation of defers exposed two other issues.
Issue #32477: Fix has been submitted as CL 181258.
Issue #32498: Possible fix is CL 181377 (not submitted yet).
Change-Id: I32b3365d5026600069291b068bbba6cb15295eb3
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/181378
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
This reverts commit fff4f599fe.
Reason for revert: Seems to still have issues around GC.
Fixes#32452
Change-Id: Ibe7af629f9ad6a3d5312acd7b066123f484da7f0
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/180761
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Josh Bleecher Snyder <josharian@gmail.com>
When a defer is executed at most once in a function body,
we can allocate the defer record for it on the stack instead
of on the heap.
This should make defers like this (which are very common) faster.
This optimization applies to 363 out of the 370 static defer sites
in the cmd/go binary.
name old time/op new time/op delta
Defer-4 52.2ns ± 5% 36.2ns ± 3% -30.70% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
Fixes#6980
Update #14939
Change-Id: I697109dd7aeef9e97a9eeba2ef65ff53d3ee1004
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/171758
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Austin Clements <austin@google.com>
The CL 164718 mistyped the comparison flags. The rules for floating
point comparison should be GreaterThanF and GreaterEqualF. Fortunately,
the wrong optimizations were overwritten by other integer rules, so the
issue won't cause failure but just some performance impact.
The fixed CL optimizes the floating point test as follows.
source code: func foo(f float64) bool { return f > 4 || f < -4}
previous version: "FCMPD", "CSET\tGT", "CBZ"
fixed version: "FCMPD", BLE"
Add the test case.
Change-Id: Iea954fdbb8272b2d642dae0f816dc77286e6e1fa
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/177121
Reviewed-by: Ben Shi <powerman1st@163.com>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
Run-TryBot: Ben Shi <powerman1st@163.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
This CL adds intrinsics for the 64-bit addition and subtraction
functions in math/bits. These intrinsics use the condition code
to propagate the carry or borrow bit.
To make the carry chains more efficient I've removed the
'clobberFlags' property from most of the load and store
operations. Originally these ops did clobber flags when using
offsets that didn't fit in a signed 20-bit integer, however
that is no longer true.
As with other platforms the intrinsics are faster when executed
in a chain rather than a loop because currently we need to spill
and restore the carry bit between each loop iteration. We may
be able to reduce the need to do this on s390x (e.g. by using
compare-and-branch instructions that do not clobber flags) in the
future.
name old time/op new time/op delta
Add64 1.21ns ± 2% 2.03ns ± 2% +67.18% (p=0.000 n=7+10)
Add64multiple 2.98ns ± 3% 1.03ns ± 0% -65.39% (p=0.000 n=10+9)
Sub64 1.23ns ± 4% 2.03ns ± 1% +64.85% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
Sub64multiple 3.73ns ± 4% 1.04ns ± 1% -72.28% (p=0.000 n=10+8)
Change-Id: I913bbd5e19e6b95bef52f5bc4f14d6fe40119083
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/174303
Run-TryBot: Michael Munday <mike.munday@ibm.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
This enables more of the testcases in memcombine for ppc64le,
and adds more detail to some existing.
Change-Id: Ic522a1175bed682b546909c96f9ea758f8db247c
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/174737
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Run-TryBot: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
"Division by invariant integers using multiplication" paper
by Granlund and Montgomery contains a method for directly computing
divisibility (x%c == 0 for c constant) by means of the modular inverse.
The method is further elaborated in "Hacker's Delight" by Warren Section 10-17
This general rule can compute divisibilty by one multiplication, and add
and a compare for odd divisors and an additional rotate for even divisors.
To apply the divisibility rule, we must take into account
the rules to rewrite x%c = x-((x/c)*c) and (x/c) for c constant on the first
optimization pass "opt". This complicates the matching as we want to match
only in the cases where the result of (x/c) is not also needed.
So, we must match on the expanded form of (x/c) in the expression x == c*(x/c)
in the "late opt" pass after common subexpresion elimination.
Note, that if there is an intermediate opt pass introduced in the future we
could simplify these rules by delaying the magic division rewrite to "late opt"
and matching directly on (x/c) in the intermediate opt pass.
On amd64, the divisibility check is 30-45% faster.
name old time/op new time/op delta`
DivisiblePow2constI64-4 0.83ns ± 1% 0.82ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.079 n=5+4)
DivisibleconstI64-4 2.68ns ± 1% 1.87ns ± 0% -30.33% (p=0.000 n=5+4)
DivisibleWDivconstI64-4 2.69ns ± 1% 2.71ns ± 3% ~ (p=1.000 n=5+5)
DivisiblePow2constI32-4 1.15ns ± 1% 1.15ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.238 n=5+4)
DivisibleconstI32-4 2.24ns ± 1% 1.20ns ± 0% -46.48% (p=0.016 n=5+4)
DivisibleWDivconstI32-4 2.27ns ± 1% 2.27ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.683 n=5+5)
DivisiblePow2constI16-4 0.81ns ± 1% 0.82ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.135 n=5+5)
DivisibleconstI16-4 2.11ns ± 2% 1.20ns ± 1% -42.99% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivisibleWDivconstI16-4 2.23ns ± 0% 2.27ns ± 2% +1.79% (p=0.029 n=4+4)
DivisiblePow2constI8-4 0.81ns ± 1% 0.81ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.286 n=5+5)
DivisibleconstI8-4 2.13ns ± 3% 1.19ns ± 1% -43.84% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivisibleWDivconstI8-4 2.23ns ± 1% 2.25ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.183 n=5+5)
Fixes#30282Fixes#15806
Change-Id: Id20d78263a4fdfe0509229ae4dfa2fede83fc1d0
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/173998
Run-TryBot: Brian Kessler <brian.m.kessler@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
This change creates an intrinsic for Add64 for ppc64x and adds a
testcase for it.
name old time/op new time/op delta
Add64-160 1.90ns ±40% 2.29ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.119 n=5+5)
Add64multiple-160 6.69ns ± 2% 2.45ns ± 4% -63.47% (p=0.016 n=4+5)
Change-Id: I9abe6fb023fdf62eea3c9b46a1820f60bb0a7f97
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/173758
Reviewed-by: Lynn Boger <laboger@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Run-TryBot: Carlos Eduardo Seo <cseo@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
"Division by invariant integers using multiplication" paper
by Granlund and Montgomery contains a method for directly computing
divisibility (x%c == 0 for c constant) by means of the modular inverse.
The method is further elaborated in "Hacker's Delight" by Warren Section 10-17
This general rule can compute divisibilty by one multiplication and a compare
for odd divisors and an additional rotate for even divisors.
To apply the divisibility rule, we must take into account
the rules to rewrite x%c = x-((x/c)*c) and (x/c) for c constant on the first
optimization pass "opt". This complicates the matching as we want to match
only in the cases where the result of (x/c) is not also available.
So, we must match on the expanded form of (x/c) in the expression x == c*(x/c)
in the "late opt" pass after common subexpresion elimination.
Note, that if there is an intermediate opt pass introduced in the future we
could simplify these rules by delaying the magic division rewrite to "late opt"
and matching directly on (x/c) in the intermediate opt pass.
Additional rules to lower the generic RotateLeft* ops were also applied.
On amd64, the divisibility check is 25-50% faster.
name old time/op new time/op delta
DivconstI64-4 2.08ns ± 0% 2.08ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.881 n=5+5)
DivisibleconstI64-4 2.67ns ± 0% 2.67ns ± 1% ~ (p=1.000 n=5+5)
DivisibleWDivconstI64-4 2.67ns ± 0% 2.67ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.683 n=5+5)
DivconstU64-4 2.08ns ± 1% 2.08ns ± 1% ~ (p=1.000 n=5+5)
DivisibleconstU64-4 2.77ns ± 1% 1.55ns ± 2% -43.90% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivisibleWDivconstU64-4 2.99ns ± 1% 2.99ns ± 1% ~ (p=1.000 n=5+5)
DivconstI32-4 1.53ns ± 2% 1.53ns ± 0% ~ (p=1.000 n=5+5)
DivisibleconstI32-4 2.23ns ± 0% 2.25ns ± 3% ~ (p=0.167 n=5+5)
DivisibleWDivconstI32-4 2.27ns ± 1% 2.27ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.429 n=5+5)
DivconstU32-4 1.78ns ± 0% 1.78ns ± 1% ~ (p=1.000 n=4+5)
DivisibleconstU32-4 2.52ns ± 2% 1.26ns ± 0% -49.96% (p=0.000 n=5+4)
DivisibleWDivconstU32-4 2.63ns ± 0% 2.85ns ±10% +8.29% (p=0.016 n=4+5)
DivconstI16-4 1.54ns ± 0% 1.54ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.333 n=4+5)
DivisibleconstI16-4 2.10ns ± 0% 2.10ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.571 n=4+5)
DivisibleWDivconstI16-4 2.22ns ± 0% 2.23ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.556 n=4+5)
DivconstU16-4 1.09ns ± 0% 1.01ns ± 1% -7.74% (p=0.000 n=4+5)
DivisibleconstU16-4 1.83ns ± 0% 1.26ns ± 0% -31.52% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivisibleWDivconstU16-4 1.88ns ± 0% 1.89ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.365 n=5+5)
DivconstI8-4 1.54ns ± 1% 1.54ns ± 1% ~ (p=1.000 n=5+5)
DivisibleconstI8-4 2.10ns ± 0% 2.11ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.238 n=5+4)
DivisibleWDivconstI8-4 2.22ns ± 0% 2.23ns ± 2% ~ (p=0.762 n=5+5)
DivconstU8-4 0.92ns ± 1% 0.94ns ± 1% +2.65% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivisibleconstU8-4 1.66ns ± 0% 1.26ns ± 1% -24.28% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivisibleWDivconstU8-4 1.79ns ± 0% 1.80ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.079 n=4+5)
A follow-up change will address the signed division case.
Updates #30282
Change-Id: I7e995f167179aa5c76bb10fbcbeb49c520943403
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/168037
Run-TryBot: Brian Kessler <brian.m.kessler@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
For powers of two (c=1<<k), the divisibility check x%c == 0 can be made
just by checking the trailing zeroes via a mask x&(c-1) == 0 even for signed
integers. This avoids division fix-ups when just divisibility check is needed.
To apply this rule, we match on the fixed-up version of the division. This is
neccessary because the mod and division rewrite rules are already applied
during the initial opt pass.
The speed up on amd64 due to elimination of unneccessary fix-up code is ~55%:
name old time/op new time/op delta
DivconstI64-4 2.08ns ± 0% 2.09ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.730 n=5+5)
DivisiblePow2constI64-4 1.78ns ± 1% 0.81ns ± 1% -54.66% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivconstU64-4 2.08ns ± 0% 2.08ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.683 n=5+5)
DivconstI32-4 1.53ns ± 0% 1.53ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.968 n=4+5)
DivisiblePow2constI32-4 1.79ns ± 1% 0.81ns ± 1% -54.97% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivconstU32-4 1.78ns ± 1% 1.80ns ± 2% ~ (p=0.206 n=5+5)
DivconstI16-4 1.54ns ± 2% 1.54ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.238 n=5+4)
DivisiblePow2constI16-4 1.78ns ± 0% 0.81ns ± 1% -54.72% (p=0.000 n=4+5)
DivconstU16-4 1.00ns ± 5% 1.01ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.119 n=5+5)
DivconstI8-4 1.54ns ± 0% 1.54ns ± 2% ~ (p=0.571 n=4+5)
DivisiblePow2constI8-4 1.78ns ± 0% 0.82ns ± 8% -53.71% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivconstU8-4 0.93ns ± 1% 0.93ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.643 n=5+5)
A follow-up CL will address the general case of x%c == 0 for signed integers.
Updates #15806
Change-Id: Iabadbbe369b6e0998c8ce85d038ebc236142e42a
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/173557
Run-TryBot: Brian Kessler <brian.m.kessler@gmail.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
This reverts CL 168038 (git 68819fb6d2)
Reason for revert: Doesn't work on 32 bit archs.
Change-Id: Idec9098060dc65bc2f774c5383f0477f8eb63a3d
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/173442
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
For powers of two (c=1<<k), the divisibility check x%c == 0 can be made
just by checking the trailing zeroes via a mask x&(c-1)==0 even for signed
integers. This avoids division fixups when just divisibility check is needed.
To apply this rule the generic divisibility rule for A%B = A-(A/B*B) is disabled
on the "opt" pass, but this does not affect generated code as this rule is applied
later.
The speed up on amd64 due to elimination of unneccessary fixup code is ~55%:
name old time/op new time/op delta
DivconstI64-4 2.08ns ± 0% 2.07ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.079 n=5+5)
DivisiblePow2constI64-4 1.78ns ± 1% 0.81ns ± 1% -54.55% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivconstU64-4 2.08ns ± 0% 2.08ns ± 0% ~ (p=1.000 n=5+5)
DivconstI32-4 1.53ns ± 0% 1.53ns ± 0% ~ (all equal)
DivisiblePow2constI32-4 1.79ns ± 1% 0.81ns ± 4% -54.75% (p=0.008 n=5+5)
DivconstU32-4 1.78ns ± 1% 1.78ns ± 1% ~ (p=1.000 n=5+5)
DivconstI16-4 1.54ns ± 2% 1.53ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.333 n=5+4)
DivisiblePow2constI16-4 1.78ns ± 0% 0.79ns ± 1% -55.39% (p=0.000 n=4+5)
DivconstU16-4 1.00ns ± 5% 0.99ns ± 1% ~ (p=0.730 n=5+5)
DivconstI8-4 1.54ns ± 0% 1.53ns ± 0% ~ (p=0.714 n=4+5)
DivisiblePow2constI8-4 1.78ns ± 0% 0.80ns ± 0% -55.06% (p=0.000 n=5+4)
DivconstU8-4 0.93ns ± 1% 0.95ns ± 1% +1.72% (p=0.024 n=5+5)
A follow-up CL will address the general case of x%c == 0 for signed integers.
Updates #15806
Change-Id: I0d284863774b1bc8c4ce87443bbaec6103e14ef4
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/168038
Reviewed-by: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
In 31618, we end up comparing the is-stmt-ness of positions
to repurpose real instructions as inline marks. If the is-stmt-ness
doesn't match, we end up not being able to remove the inline mark.
Always use statement-full positions to do the matching, so we
always find a match if there is one.
Also always use positions that are statements for inline marks.
Fixes#31618
Change-Id: Idaf39bdb32fa45238d5cd52973cadf4504f947d5
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/173324
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: David Chase <drchase@google.com>
These new calls should not prevent NOSPLIT promotion, like the old ones.
These new calls should not prevent racefuncenter/exit removal.
(The latter was already true, as the new calls are not yet lowered
to StaticCalls at the point where racefuncenter/exit removal is done.)
Add tests to make sure we don't regress (again).
Fixes#31219
Change-Id: I3fb6b17cdd32c425829f1e2498defa813a5a9ace
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/170639
Run-TryBot: Keith Randall <khr@golang.org>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Ilya Tocar <ilya.tocar@intel.com>
This CL instrinsifies Add64 with arm64 instruction sequence ADDS, ADCS
and ADC, and optimzes the case of carry chains.The CL also changes the
test code so that the intrinsic implementation can be tested.
Benchmarks:
name old time/op new time/op delta
Add-224 2.500000ns +- 0% 2.090000ns +- 4% -16.40% (p=0.000 n=9+10)
Add32-224 2.500000ns +- 0% 2.500000ns +- 0% ~ (all equal)
Add64-224 2.500000ns +- 0% 1.577778ns +- 2% -36.89% (p=0.000 n=10+9)
Add64multiple-224 6.000000ns +- 0% 2.000000ns +- 0% -66.67% (p=0.000 n=10+10)
Change-Id: I6ee91c9a85c16cc72ade5fd94868c579f16c7615
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/c/go/+/159017
Run-TryBot: Ben Shi <powerman1st@163.com>
TryBot-Result: Gobot Gobot <gobot@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Cherry Zhang <cherryyz@google.com>
