| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
example
When writing an email for a follow up proposal, I realized one of the diffs in the committed change was incorrect. Digging into it revealed that the fix is complicated enough to require some thought, so reverting in the meantime.
The problem is visible in this diff (from the revert):
; X64-SSE-LABEL: store_fp128:
; X64-SSE: # %bb.0:
-; X64-SSE-NEXT: movaps %xmm0, (%rdi)
+; X64-SSE-NEXT: subq $24, %rsp
+; X64-SSE-NEXT: .cfi_def_cfa_offset 32
+; X64-SSE-NEXT: movaps %xmm0, (%rsp)
+; X64-SSE-NEXT: movq (%rsp), %rsi
+; X64-SSE-NEXT: movq {{[0-9]+}}(%rsp), %rdx
+; X64-SSE-NEXT: callq __sync_lock_test_and_set_16
+; X64-SSE-NEXT: addq $24, %rsp
+; X64-SSE-NEXT: .cfi_def_cfa_offset 8
; X64-SSE-NEXT: retq
store atomic fp128 %v, fp128* %fptr unordered, align 16
ret void
The problem here is three fold:
1) x86-64 doesn't guarantee atomicity of anything larger than 8 bytes. Some platforms observably break this guarantee, others don't, but the codegen isn't considering this, so it's wrong on at least some platforms.
2) When I started to track down the problem, I discovered that DAGCombiner had stripped the atomicity off the store entirely. This comes down to idiomatic usage of DAG.getStore passing all MMO components separately as opposed to just passing the MMO.
3) On x86 (not -64), there are cases where 8 byte atomiciy is supported, but only for floating point operations. This would seem to imply that operation typing matters for correctness, and DAGCombine happily folds away bitcasts. I'm not 100% sure there's a problem here, but I'm not entirely sure there isn't either.
I plan on returning to each issue in turn; sorry for the churn here.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
stores w/StoreSDNode) by default
Enable the new SelectionDAG representation for unordered loads and stores introduced in r371441 by default. As a reminder, the new lowering changes the representation of an unordered atomic load from an AtomicSDNode - which is essentially a black box which gets passed through without combines messing with it - to a LoadSDNode w/a atomic marker on the MMO. The later parallels the way we handle volatiles, and I've audited the code to ensure that every location which checks one checks the other.
This has been fairly heavily fuzzed, and I examined diffs in a reasonable large corpus of assembly by hand, so I'm reasonable sure this is correct for the common case. Late in the review for this, it was discovered that I hadn't correctly handled cases which could be legalized into CAS operations. This points out that there's a strong bias in the IR of the frontend I'm working with towards only legal atomics. If there are problems with this patch, the most likely area will be legalization.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D69219
|
