Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[MonoVM] Fix assert on startup with abcrem optimization enabled #108469

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Nov 2, 2024

Conversation

filipnavara
Copy link
Member

@filipnavara filipnavara commented Oct 2, 2024

Match the logic in mini_emit_sext_index_reg and OP_BOUNDS_CHECK decomposition. This was already done for LLVM but not for any other target. Instead there was an assert which was hit early on startup when the optimization was enabled (tested on ARM64).

The optimization is not enabled by default but that's separate issue. There are potentially some performance wins to have. For example, the Burgers benchmarks in dotnet/performance shows this:

Default:

| Method    | Mean       | Error   | StdDev  | Median     | Min        | Max        | Gen0       | Gen1       | Gen2       | Allocated    |
|---------- |-----------:|--------:|--------:|-----------:|-----------:|-----------:|-----------:|-----------:|-----------:|-------------:|
| Burgers_3 |   487.9 ms | 2.33 ms | 2.06 ms |   488.2 ms |   483.5 ms |   490.7 ms |          - |          - |          - |    156.76 KB |
| Burgers_0 | 1,266.8 ms | 3.19 ms | 2.83 ms | 1,265.5 ms | 1,264.5 ms | 1,273.6 ms | 47000.0000 | 47000.0000 | 47000.0000 | 781750.05 KB |
| Burgers_1 | 1,180.1 ms | 2.98 ms | 2.49 ms | 1,180.4 ms | 1,176.5 ms | 1,185.3 ms |          - |          - |          - |    156.74 KB |
| Burgers_2 |   286.9 ms | 0.17 ms | 0.15 ms |   286.9 ms |   286.6 ms |   287.0 ms |          - |          - |          - |    156.74 KB |

With -O=abcrem:

| Method    | Mean       | Error   | StdDev  | Median     | Min        | Max        | Gen0       | Gen1       | Gen2       | Allocated    |
|---------- |-----------:|--------:|--------:|-----------:|-----------:|-----------:|-----------:|-----------:|-----------:|-------------:|
| Burgers_3 |   395.5 ms | 1.25 ms | 1.11 ms |   395.6 ms |   394.0 ms |   397.8 ms |          - |          - |          - |    156.76 KB |
| Burgers_0 | 1,167.8 ms | 5.45 ms | 4.83 ms | 1,167.5 ms | 1,161.5 ms | 1,176.8 ms | 47000.0000 | 47000.0000 | 47000.0000 | 781750.05 KB |
| Burgers_1 | 1,104.2 ms | 2.82 ms | 2.64 ms | 1,102.9 ms | 1,100.4 ms | 1,108.5 ms |          - |          - |          - |    156.74 KB |
| Burgers_2 |   192.2 ms | 0.36 ms | 0.30 ms |   192.2 ms |   191.8 ms |   192.8 ms |          - |          - |          - |    156.74 KB |

@dotnet-issue-labeler dotnet-issue-labeler bot added the needs-area-label An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners label Oct 2, 2024
@dotnet-policy-service dotnet-policy-service bot added the community-contribution Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member label Oct 2, 2024
Copy link
Member

@steveisok steveisok left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm ok w/ it assuming the assert is no longer necessary for what we ship.

@filipnavara
Copy link
Member Author

It just moves the need_sext handling one level up from the LLVM code branch so it applies to all targets, so we don't need the assert anymore. It's currently not used in any shipping code AFAIK.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
community-contribution Indicates that the PR has been added by a community member needs-area-label An area label is needed to ensure this gets routed to the appropriate area owners
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants