[RFC] [PATCH v3 0/8] [i386] Use out-of-line stubs for ms_abi pro/epilogues

Daniel Santos daniel.santos@pobox.com
Tue Feb 7 18:34:00 GMT 2017


I apologize to those of you who get this twice, but I accidentally 
posted to the wrong list!

Uros or Jan,
Please take this as a ping, as I never bothered pinging after submitting 
v2 since I found a few more issues with it. :) Although I realize this 
would be a GCC 8 stage 1 item, I would like to try to get it finished up 
and tentatively approved as soon as I can.  I have tried to summarize 
this patch set as clearly and succinctly below as possible.  Thanks!

  * This patch set depends upon the "Use aligned SSE movs for re-aligned
    MS ABI pro/epilogues" patch set:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-12/msg01859.html
  * I have submitted a test program submitted separately:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-02/msg00542.html


Summary
=======

When a 64-bit Microsoft function calls and System V function, ABI 
differences requires RSI, RDI and XMM6-15 to be considered as 
clobbered.  Saving these registers inline can cost as much as 109 bytes 
and a similar amount for restoring. This patch set targets 64-bit Wine 
and aims to mitigate some of these costs by adding ms/sysv save & 
restore stubs to libgcc, which are called from pro/epilogues rather than 
emitting the code inline.  And since we're already tinkering with stubs, 
they will also manages the save/restore of all remaining registers if 
possible.  Analysis of building Wine 64 demonstrates a reduction of 
.text by around 20%, which also translates into a reduction of Wine's 
install size by 34MiB.

As there will usually only be 3 stubs in memory at any time, I'm using 
the larger mov instructions instead of push/pop to facilitate better 
parallelization. The basic theory is that the combination of better 
parallelization and reduced I-cache misses will offset the extra 
instructions required for implementation, although I have not produced 
actual performance data yet.

For now, I have called this feature -moutline-msabi-xlogues, but Sandra 
Loosemore has this suggestion: 
(https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2016-11/msg02670.html)

> Just as a suggestion (I'm not an i386 maintainer), I'd recommend
> spelling the name of this option -mno-inline-msabi-xlogues instead of
> -moutline-msabi-xlogues, and making the default -minline-msabi-xlogues.

When enabled, the feature is activated when an ms_abi function calls a 
sysv_abi function if the following is true (evaluated in 
ix86_compute_frame_layout):

     TARGET_SSE
     && !ix86_function_ms_hook_prologue (current_function_decl)
     && !SEH
     && !crtl->calls_eh_return
     && !ix86_static_chain_on_stack
     && !ix86_using_red_zone ()
     && !flag_split_stack

Some of these, like __builtin_eh_return, might be easy to add but I 
don't have a test for them.


StackLayout
============

When active, registers are saved on the stack differently. Note that 
when not active, stack layout is *unchanged*.

     [arguments]
                             <- ARG_POINTER
     saved pc

     saved frame pointer     if frame_pointer_needed
                             <- HARD_FRAME_POINTER
     [saved regs]            if not managed by stub, (e.g. explicitly 
clobbered)
                             <- reg_save_offset
     [padding0]
                             <- stack_realign_offset
                             <- Start of out-of-line, stub-managed regs
     XMM6-15
     RSI
     RDI
     [RBX]                   if RBX is clobbered
     [RBP]                   if RBP and RBX are clobbered and HFP not used.
     [R12]                   if R12 and all previous regs are clobbered
     [R13]                   if R13 and all previous regs are clobbered
     [R14]                   if R14 and all previous regs are clobbered
     [R15]                   if R15 and all previous regs are clobbered
                             <- end of stub-saved/restored regs
     [padding1]
                             <- outlined_save_offset
                             <- sse_regs_save_offset
     [padding2]
                             <- FRAME_POINTER
     [va_arg registers]

     [frame]
     ... etc.


Stubs
=====

There are two sets of stubs for use with and without hard frame 
pointers.  Each set has a save, a restore and a restore-as-tail-call 
that performs the function's return.  Each stub has entry points for the 
number of registers it's saving. The non-tail-call restore is used when 
a sibling call is the tail.  If a normal register is explicitly 
clobbered out of the order that hard registers are usually assigned in 
(e.g., __asm__ __volatile__ ("":::"r15")), then that register will be 
saved and restored as normal and not by the stub.

Stub names:
__savms64_(12-18)
__resms64_(12-18)
__resms64x_(12-18)

__savms64f_(12-17)
__resms64f_(12-17)
__resms64fx_(12-17)

Save stubs use RAX as a base register and restore stubs use RSI, the 
later which is overwritten before returning. Restore-as-tail-call for 
the non-HFP case uses R10 to restore the stack pointer before returning.

Samples
=======

Standard case with RBX, RBP and R12 also being used in function:

   Prologue:
     lea    -0x78(%rsp),%rax
     sub    $0x108,%rsp
     callq  5874b <__savms64_15>

   Epilogue (r10 stores the value to restore the stack pointer to):
     lea    0x90(%rsp),%rsi
     lea    0x78(%rsi),%r10
     jmpq   587eb <__resms64x_15>

Stack pointer realignment case (same clobbers):

   Prologue, stack realignment case:
     push   %rbp
     mov    %rsp,%rbp
     and    $0xfffffffffffffff0,%rsp
     lea    -0x70(%rsp),%rax
     sub    $0x100,%rsp
     callq  57fc7 <__savms64f_15>

   Epilogue, stack realignment case:
     lea    0x90(%rsp),%rsi
     jmpq   58013 <__resms64fx_15>


Testing
=======

A comprehensive test program is submitted separately with no additional 
tests failing.  I have also run Wine's tests with no additional failures 
(although a few very minor tweaks have gone in since I last ran Wine's 
tests).  I have not run -flto tests on Wine as I haven't yet found a way 
to Wine to build with -flto, maybe I'm just doing it wrong.

Daniel Santos

  gcc/config/i386/i386.c         | 700 
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
  gcc/config/i386/i386.h         |  22 +-
  gcc/config/i386/i386.opt       |   5 +
  gcc/config/i386/predicates.md  | 155 +++++++++
  gcc/config/i386/sse.md         |  37 +++
  gcc/doc/invoke.texi            |  11 +-
  libgcc/config.host             |   2 +-
  libgcc/config/i386/i386-asm.h  |  82 +++++
  libgcc/config/i386/resms64.S   |  57 ++++
  libgcc/config/i386/resms64f.S  |  55 ++++
  libgcc/config/i386/resms64fx.S |  57 ++++
  libgcc/config/i386/resms64x.S  |  59 ++++
  libgcc/config/i386/savms64.S   |  57 ++++
  libgcc/config/i386/savms64f.S  |  55 ++++
  libgcc/config/i386/t-msabi     |   7 +
  15 files changed, 1323 insertions(+), 38 deletions(-)



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list