JIT: Avoid mask<->vector optimization for masks used in unhandled ways #110307
Conversation
When a local is used as a return buffer it is not address exposed, so the address-exposure check was not sufficient. Add checks for `LCL_ADDR`, `LCL_FLD` and `STORE_LCL_FLD` to make sure any use of a mask local that is not converted disqualifies it from participating in the optimization.
dotnet-issue-labeler
bot
added
the
area-CodeGen-coreclr
jakobbotsch
force-pushed
the
fix-110306
branch
from
15b3c39 to
a8a0d8d
Compare
|
I haven't looked into them, but I suspect this will also fix the "Assert |
|
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib PTAL @a74nh @tannergooding |
|
Do we not have an outerloop job testing Is that why these didn't get caught after the initial PR went in, and only after the x64 support came online? |
The existing pipeline is broken because it was not testing the right thing. I had #107475 but I saw some other non-sve failures which I didn't get time to investigate. We would get Cobalt machines in CI added shortly, so going forward, it will get caught naturally. |
This doesn't repro on arm64 because SIMD16 is always returned by value there, which the existing checks handled. On xarch we have the possibility of the vector being defined as a return buffer, where it doesn't end up address exposed. The checks weren't sufficient for that. |
Could this appear on Arm64? Interesting as I never saw any failures myself on Fuzzlyn Arm64. |
I don't believe we do this for cases like |
16 byte structs on ARM64 are returned in two registers, not via return buffer. |
The |
For some classifications, not all classifications. There are multiple factors that influence it including total size, whether it is all integer, all floating-point, all SIMD, or mixed data types, etc. The classifications are effectively But regardless, my point was that I imagine this general issue should've been reproducible on SVE, it is not unique to x64 |
If we had larger SIMD types on arm64 than TYP_SIMD16, then yes, it would presumably be reproducible. But as it currently is, since we only end up with |
|
/azp run Antigen |
|
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
|
/ba-g Helix work item was dead-lettered |
dotnet#110307) When a local is used as a return buffer it is not address exposed, so the address-exposure check was not sufficient. Add checks for `LCL_ADDR`, `LCL_FLD` and `STORE_LCL_FLD` to make sure any use of a mask local that is not converted disqualifies it from participating in the optimization. Also avoid doing some work for locals that are not SIMD/mask typed (common case). Previously we would do some unnecessary hash table lookups and other things in these cases.
dotnet#110307) When a local is used as a return buffer it is not address exposed, so the address-exposure check was not sufficient. Add checks for `LCL_ADDR`, `LCL_FLD` and `STORE_LCL_FLD` to make sure any use of a mask local that is not converted disqualifies it from participating in the optimization. Also avoid doing some work for locals that are not SIMD/mask typed (common case). Previously we would do some unnecessary hash table lookups and other things in these cases.
When a local is used as a return buffer it is not address exposed, so the address-exposure check was not sufficient. Add checks for
LCL_ADDR,LCL_FLDandSTORE_LCL_FLDto make sure any use of a mask local that is not converted disqualifies it from participating in the optimization.Also avoid doing some work for locals that are not SIMD/mask typed (common case). Previously we would do some unnecessary hash table lookups and other things in these cases.
Fix #110306