[Vm-dev] Debugging Spur32 genPrimitiveHighBit
Nicolas Cellier
nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com
Tue Feb 18 21:53:25 UTC 2020
Hi all,
I confirm that generated code for CLZ (LZCNT) is incorrect on IA32 arch.
The registers are swapped!
Here is an extract:
0x5c26a9c: 83 e0 01 andl $0x1, %eax
0x5c26a9f: eb 11 jmp 0x5c26ab2
0x5c26aa1: 90 nop
0x5c26aa2: 90 nop
0x5c26aa3: 90 nop
0x5c26aa4: 89 d0 movl %edx, %eax
0x5c26aa6: 83 e0 03 andl $0x3, %eax
0x5c26aa9: 75 f1 jne 0x5c26a9c
0x5c26aab: 8b 02 movl (%edx), %eax
0x5c26aad: 25 ff ff 3f 00 andl $0x3fffff, %eax ; imm =
0x3FFFFF
0x5c26ab2: 39 c8 cmpl %ecx, %eax
0x5c26ab4: 75 e0 jne 0x5c26a96
0x5c26ab6: f3 0f bd d0 lzcntl %eax, %edx
0x5c26aba: 74 0d je 0x5c26ac9
0x5c26abc: 35 1f 00 00 00 xorl $0x1f, %eax
0x5c26ac1: 89 c2 movl %eax, %edx
0x5c26ac3: d1 e2 shll %edx
0x5c26ac5: 83 c2 01 addl $0x1, %edx
0x5c26ac8: c3 retl
What happens is that we count the leading zeros in $eax (TempReg) and store
the result in $edx (ReceiverResultReg) ...
0x5c26ab6: f3 0f bd d0 lzcntl %eax, %edx
We want the contrary!
$eax contains 1, presumably because we used it to check for SmallInteger
tag bit:
0x5c26a9c: 83 e0 01 andl $0x1, %eax
So we invariably get 31 leading zeroes in $edx (but we will later overwrite
the contents of $edx).
Then we interpret $eax as the result (thus 1 leading zero), bitInvert, and
get 30 as the result for highBit, store that in $edx (shifted and tagged),
and we're done... Err!
Obviously the code generation is wrong!
It did work when I first wrote it, and still work on x64 because we use
$eax (TempReg) as both source and dest reg...
Though, I do not see what we are doing wrong:
concretizeClzRR
<inline: true>
| maskReg dest |
maskReg := operands at: 0.
dest := operands at: 1.
machineCode
at: 0 put: 16rF3;
at: 1 put: 16r0F;
at: 2 put: 16rBD;
at: 3 put: (self mod: ModReg RM: dest RO: maskReg).
^4
and we invoke it like that:
cogit ClzR: srcReg R: destReg.
ClzR: reg1 R: reg2
"reg2 := reg1 countLeadingZeros"
<inline: true>
<returnTypeC: #'AbstractInstruction *'>
^self gen: ClzRR operand: reg1 operand: reg2
So it seems to me that all is in the correct order...
cogitIA32 likewise seems perfrectly correct:
static sqInt
genPrimitiveHighBit(void)
{
AbstractInstruction *anInstruction11;
AbstractInstruction *anInstruction2;
AbstractInstruction *anInstruction4;
AbstractInstruction *jumpNegativeReceiver;
AbstractInstruction *jumpNegativeReceiver11;
AbstractInstruction *jumpNegativeReceiver3;
sqInt literal1;
/* remove excess tag bits from the receiver oop */
/* and use the abstract cogit facility for case of single tag-bit */
/* begin genHighBitIn:ofSmallIntegerOopWithSingleTagBit: */
if (((ceCheckLZCNT()) & (1U << 5)) != 0) {
/* begin genHighBitClzIn:ofSmallIntegerOopWithSingleTagBit:
*/
genoperandoperand(ClzRR, ReceiverResultReg, TempReg);
if (!(setsConditionCodesFor(lastOpcode(), JumpZero))) {
/* begin checkQuickConstant:forInstruction: */
anInstruction2 = genoperandoperand(CmpCqR, 0,
TempReg);
}
/* Note the nice bit trick below:
highBit_1based_of_small_int_value = (BytesPerWord * 8) -
leadingZeroCout_of_oop - 1 toAccountForTagBit.
This is like 2 complements (- reg - 1) on (BytesPerWord
* 8) log2 bits, or exactly a bit invert operation... */
jumpNegativeReceiver3 =
genConditionalBranchoperand(JumpZero, ((sqInt)0));
/* begin checkLiteral:forInstruction: */
literal1 = (BytesPerWord * 8) - 1;
anInstruction11 = genoperandoperand(XorCwR, (BytesPerWord *
8) - 1, TempReg);
jumpNegativeReceiver = jumpNegativeReceiver3;
goto l10;
}
which concretize in:
case ClzRR:
/* begin concretizeClzRR */
maskReg = ((self_in_dispatchConcretize->operands))[0];
dest = ((self_in_dispatchConcretize->operands))[1];
((self_in_dispatchConcretize->machineCode))[0] = 243;
((self_in_dispatchConcretize->machineCode))[1] = 15;
((self_in_dispatchConcretize->machineCode))[2] = 189;
((self_in_dispatchConcretize->machineCode))[3] =
(modRMRO(self_in_dispatchConcretize, ModReg, dest, maskReg));
return 4;
The order seems correct all the way down...
As a workaround, I could revert Eliot's optimization and force a
cogit MoveR: ReceiverResultReg R: TempReg.
But I'd rather want to understand where's the problem...
Another pair of eyes may help!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20200218/47d058fb/attachment.html>
More information about the Vm-dev
mailing list