BPF Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
To: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
	"alexei.starovoitov\@gmail.com" <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
	"bpf\@vger.kernel.org" <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
	"oss-drivers\@netronome.com" <oss-drivers@netronome.com>
Subject: Re: [LLVM PATCH] bpf: fix wrong truncation elimination when there is back-edge/loop
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 16:33:15 +0100
Message-ID: <4l08k8n8.fsf@cbtest28.netronome.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1rvepbpe.fsf@cbtest28.netronome.com>


Jiong Wang writes:

> Yonghong Song writes:
>
>> On 10/12/19 12:18 AM, Jiong Wang wrote:
>>> Currently, BPF backend is doing truncation elimination. If one truncation
>>> is performed on a value defined by narrow loads, then it could be redundant
>>> given BPF loads zero extend the destination register implicitly.
>>> 
>>> When the definition of the truncated value is a merging value (PHI node)
>>> that could come from different code paths, then checks need to be done on
>>> all possible code paths.
>>> 
>>> Above described optimization was introduced as r306685, however it doesn't
>>> work when there is back-edge, for example when loop is used inside BPF
>>> code.
>>> 
>>> For example for the following code, a zero-extended value should be stored
>>> into b[i], but the "and reg, 0xffff" is wrongly eliminated which then
>>> generates corrupted data.
>>> 
>>> void cal1(unsigned short *a, unsigned long *b, unsigned int k)
>>> {
>>>    unsigned short e;
>>> 
>>>    e = *a;
>>>    for (unsigned int i = 0; i < k; i++) {
>>>      b[i] = e;
>>>      e = ~e;
>>>    }
>>> }
>>> 
>>> The reason is r306685 was trying to do the PHI node checks inside isel
>>> DAG2DAG phase, and the checks are done on MachineInstr. This is actually
>>> wrong, because MachineInstr is being built during isel phase and the
>>> associated information is not completed yet. A quick search shows none
>>> target other than BPF is access MachineInstr info during isel phase.
>>> 
>>> For an PHI node, when you reached it during isel phase, it may have all
>>> predecessors linked, but not successors. It seems successors are linked to
>>> PHI node only when doing SelectionDAGISel::FinishBasicBlock and this
>>> happens later than PreprocessISelDAG hook.
>>> 
>>> Previously, BPF program doesn't allow loop, there is probably the reason
>>> why this bug was not exposed.
>>> 
>>> This patch therefore fixes the bug by the following approach:
>>>   - The existing truncation elimination code and the associated
>>>     "load_to_vreg_" records are removed.
>>>   - Instead, implement truncation elimination using MachineSSA pass, this
>>>     is where all information are built, and keep the pass together with other
>>>     similar peephole optimizations inside BPFMIPeephole.cpp. Redundant move
>>>     elimination logic is updated accordingly.
>>>   - Unit testcase included + no compilation errors for kernel BPF selftest.
>>
>> Thanks for the fix. The code looks good. Just two minor comments.
>
> Thanks Yonghong. Your comments make sense to me, will fix them.
>
>> After the fix, could you directly push to the llvm repo?
>
> Sure will do.
>
> (And I will update my llvm account email first, should be quick, if it takes
> too long will come back to you for committing help)

Fix pushed after two minor comments addressed and re-unit-tested:

  https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/commit/ec51851026a55e1cfc7f006f0e75f0a19acb32d3

Regards,
Jiong

  reply index

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-12  7:18 Jiong Wang
2019-10-12 15:07 ` Yonghong Song
2019-10-15  2:41 ` Yonghong Song
2019-10-15 10:03   ` Jiong Wang
2019-10-16 15:33     ` Jiong Wang [this message]
2019-10-16 19:03       ` Yonghong Song

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4l08k8n8.fsf@cbtest28.netronome.com \
    --to=jiong.wang@netronome.com \
    --cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oss-drivers@netronome.com \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

BPF Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/0 bpf/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 bpf bpf/ https://lore.kernel.org/bpf \
		bpf@vger.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index bpf

Example config snippet for mirrors

Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.bpf


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git