Fix the representation of C void pointers in LLVM IR

[dotdash]

Currently, we have c_void defined to be represented as an empty struct,
but LLVM expects C's void* to be represented as i8*. That means we
currently generate code in which LLVM doesn't recognize malloc() and
free() and can't apply certain optimization that would remove calls to
those functions.

[alexcrichton]

Could you post some before/after code of what this change in types enables?

It's also probably worth adding to the comment on the definition of c_void as to why it's u8 (which probably isn't what one would expect)

[dotdash]

Test code:

fn main() {
    let x = ~3;
}

Compile with rustc --emit-llvm -S -O -Z lto issue11539.rs
Before:

define internal void @main::hd4b0664c300788adah::v0.0({ i64, %tydesc*, i8*, i8*, i8 }* nocapture readnone) unnamed_addr #0 {
"function top level":
  %1 = tail call %"enum.std::libc::types::common::c95::c_void[#1]"* @malloc(i64 8)
  %2 = icmp eq %"enum.std::libc::types::common::c95::c_void[#1]"* %1, null
  br i1 %2, label %_ZN2rt11global_heap10malloc_raw19h000735e5ce40b7f3aR4v0.9E.exit.thread, label %cond.i

_ZN2rt11global_heap10malloc_raw19h000735e5ce40b7f3aR4v0.9E.exit.thread: ; preds = %"function top level"
  tail call void @abort()
  call void @llvm.trap()
  unreachable

cond.i:                                           ; preds = %"function top level"
  %3 = bitcast %"enum.std::libc::types::common::c95::c_void[#1]"* %1 to i64*
  store i64 3, i64* %3, align 8
  tail call void @free(%"enum.std::libc::types::common::c95::c_void[#1]"* %1) #1
  ret void
}

After:

define internal void @main::hd4b0664c300788adah::v0.0({ i64, %tydesc*, i8*, i8*, i8 }* nocapture readnone) unnamed_addr #0 {
"_ZN13_$UP$$LP$$RP$9glue_drop19h82dc7f896d315c35a8E.exit":
  ret void
}

[dotdash]

check-stage1-std TESTNAME=zero_1kb

Before:

run: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1/test/stdtest-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

running 5 tests
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_fixed_repeat                          ... bench:        74 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_from_elem                             ... bench:       135 ns/iter (+/- 62)
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_loop_set                              ... bench:       810 ns/iter (+/- 254)
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_mut_iter                              ... bench:        73 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_set_memory                            ... bench:        74 ns/iter (+/- 1)

metrics saved to: tmp/check-stage1-T-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-H-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-std-metrics.json
test result: ok. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 5 measured

After:

run: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu/stage1/test/stdtest-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu

running 5 tests
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_fixed_repeat                          ... bench:        74 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_from_elem                             ... bench:        73 ns/iter (+/- 4)
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_loop_set                              ... bench:       550 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_mut_iter                              ... bench:        72 ns/iter (+/- 3)
test vec::bench::zero_1kb_set_memory                            ... bench:        72 ns/iter (+/- 3)

metrics saved to: tmp/check-stage1-T-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-H-x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu-std-metrics.json
test result: ok. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 5 measured

[alexcrichton]

I played around a bit, and I think we can get the same optimization with

#[repr(u8)]
pub enum c_void {
   priv variant1,
   priv variant2,
}

In order for repr to work, it needs to have at least two variants apparently? A comment could then explain why it looks like this (for optimization purposes), but this should also disallow accidental dereferencing or creation of c_void values.

[dotdash]

The test suite isn't built with LTO. With LTO we get:

Before:

running 5 tests
test zero_1kb_fixed_repeat ... bench:        54 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test zero_1kb_from_elem    ... bench:        54 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test zero_1kb_loop_set     ... bench:       528 ns/iter (+/- 2)
test zero_1kb_mut_iter     ... bench:        54 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test zero_1kb_set_memory   ... bench:        54 ns/iter (+/- 0)

test result: ok. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 5 measured

After:

running 5 tests
test zero_1kb_fixed_repeat ... bench:         0 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test zero_1kb_from_elem    ... bench:         0 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test zero_1kb_loop_set     ... bench:       528 ns/iter (+/- 1)
test zero_1kb_mut_iter     ... bench:         0 ns/iter (+/- 0)
test zero_1kb_set_memory   ... bench:         0 ns/iter (+/- 0)

test result: ok. 0 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored; 5 measured

The "before" numbers are probably faster than before, because I copied the benchmarks into their own file and we still get better inlining behaviour when there is only one user of a function.

[alexcrichton]

r+, thanks!

[bors]

saw approval from alexcrichton
at dotdash@5902263