Add range metadata to slice lengths #116542

the8472 · 2023-10-08T19:38:45Z

This adds range information to the slice-len in fat pointers if we can conservatively determine that the pointee is not a ZST without having to normalize the pointee type.

I only intended to pass the !range to llvm but apparently this also lets the length in fat pointers be used for its niches 😅.

Ideally this would use the naive-layout computation from #113166 to calculate a better approximation of the pointee size, but that PR got reverted.

rustbot · 2023-10-08T19:38:52Z

r? @cjgillot

(rustbot has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

rustbot · 2023-10-08T19:38:55Z

Changes to the size of AST and/or HIR nodes.

cc @nnethercote

RalfJung · 2023-10-08T20:41:20Z

Note that doing this for raw slice pointers would be unsound, since slice_from_raw_parts is safe.

So this PR must be introducing (for the first time) a difference in metadata validity for raw pointers vs references. Are we sure we want that?

RalfJung · 2023-10-08T20:42:29Z

compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/sty.rs

+            | ty::RawPtr(..)
+            | ty::Char
+            | ty::Ref(..)
+            | ty::Closure(..) => true,


Closure could be a ZST I think, if the environment is empty.

RalfJung · 2023-10-08T20:44:39Z

compiler/rustc_middle/src/ty/sty.rs

+            ty::Tuple(tys) => tys.iter().any(|ty| ty.is_trivially_non_zst(tcx)),
+            ty::Adt(def, args) => def.all_fields().any(|field| {
+                let ty = field.ty(tcx, args);
+                ty.is_trivially_non_zst(tcx)


This is non-obvious and deserves a comment. It relies on Result<(), (!, i32)> not removing the Err variant entirely (which plausibly it could do due to it being uninhabited -- but that would also cause issues in MIR).

RalfJung · 2023-10-08T20:45:45Z

compiler/rustc_ty_utils/src/layout.rs

                    return Err(error(cx, LayoutError::Unknown(pointee)));
                };

+                if !ty.is_unsafe_ptr() {
+                    match pointee.kind() {
+                        ty::Slice(element) => {


So &[i32] is getting the optimization but &(bool, [i32]) is not? That seems odd?

RalfJung · 2023-10-08T20:47:39Z

compiler/rustc_ty_utils/src/layout.rs

+                    ty::Slice(element) => {
+                        let mut metadata = scalar_unit(Int(dl.ptr_sized_integer(), false));
+                        if !ty.is_unsafe_ptr() && !element.is_trivially_non_zst(tcx) {
+                            metadata.valid_range_mut().end = dl.ptr_sized_integer().signed_max() as u128;


Why do we have this logic duplicated here?

the8472 · 2023-10-08T20:52:03Z

I think the test failure indicates that I've already broken something because rustc_graphviz only depends on std and doesn't have any unsafe, so its behavior should be unchanged.

nnethercote · 2023-10-08T20:53:33Z

tests/ui/stats/hir-stats.rs

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
 // check-pass
 // compile-flags: -Zhir-stats
 // only-x86_64
-
+// ignore-stage1


If this is needed temporarily, can you add a comment saying that?

write this as a cfg(bootstrap) so that it gets picked up during the version bump

the8472 · 2023-10-08T22:50:42Z

My approach probably is too naive. Apparently layout_of gets called for generic &[T] (with unresolved T)? Having different layouts for &[T] and &[<concrete type>] where one allows niches and the other doesn't seems like it would cause issues.

Though I'm a bit surprised that all the stage 2 UI/codegen/std tests pass and it "merely" fails in rustc_graphviz.

RalfJung · 2023-10-09T05:30:45Z

Yes layout_of gets called on generic types, and if it returns a result then it must be the case that instantiating the generics must not change the resulting layout. This way we can know some layout facts even before monomorphization.

With your PR this means that &[T] must return TooGeneric if it doesn't know whether T is a ZST or not.

cjgillot · 2023-10-11T11:54:56Z

Having &[T] look at the layout of T will definitely create cycles during layout computation. For instance: struct A<'a> { x: &'a [A<'a>] }. That is probably impossible.

Could we cheat by adding the annotation in codegen, on the code we generate for Len MIR statement? Just the proper range attribute. At that point we have all the layout info we need.

the8472 · 2023-10-11T12:14:20Z

For instance: struct A<'a> { x: &'a [A<'a>] }. That is probably impossible.

We don't necessarily need the full layout if we limit ourselves to adding an isize::MAX range annotation - computing more accurate, size-based ranges would require the layout - then we only need to know whether A is certainly ZST or non-ZST. since x is a reference A is known to be non-zero. That's similar to the naive layout computation in #113166, but simpler.

Just the proper range attribute.

Yeah, that's the fallback solution if I can't get this to work. It'll be simpler but lose the niches

bors · 2023-12-26T06:56:41Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #119258) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

the8472 · 2024-03-24T23:55:08Z

Back to a broken rustc_graphviz . I'm not sure how I'm breaking it. Maybe something about enum discriminants or about &str....

bors · 2024-03-26T09:12:06Z

☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #122849) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts.

…ot be ZST

the8472 · 2024-03-31T18:44:48Z

@bors try @rust-timer queue

Add range metadata to slice lengths This adds range information to the slice-len in fat pointers if we can conservatively determine that the pointee is not a ZST without having to normalize the pointee type. I only intended to pass the `!range` to llvm but apparently this also lets the length in fat pointers be used for its niches 😅. Ideally this would use the naive-layout computation from rust-lang#113166 to calculate a better approximation of the pointee size, but that PR got reverted.

bors · 2024-03-31T18:45:58Z

⌛ Trying commit c054bbc with merge cbf560f...

bors · 2024-03-31T20:19:43Z

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: cbf560f (cbf560fca7433b3a9f62c9d6f32aeb29e5bf5b29)

rust-timer · 2024-03-31T21:36:26Z

Finished benchmarking commit (cbf560f): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.5%	[0.1%, 1.0%]	28
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	0.9%	[0.3%, 2.1%]	34
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-0.9%	[-1.2%, -0.7%]	2
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.9%	[-6.9%, -0.5%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.4%	[-1.2%, 1.0%]	30

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	-	-	0
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	5.8%	[4.1%, 6.8%]	6
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-1.0%	[-1.8%, -0.7%]	4
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.7%	[-3.5%, -1.2%]	3
All ❌✅ (primary)	-1.0%	[-1.8%, -0.7%]	4

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.8%	[0.7%, 0.8%]	3
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.8%	[0.8%, 3.5%]	4
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-2.0%	[-2.9%, -1.0%]	2
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.8%	[0.7%, 0.8%]	3

Binary size

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

	mean	range	count
Regressions ❌ (primary)	0.5%	[0.0%, 2.0%]	31
Regressions ❌ (secondary)	1.3%	[0.0%, 2.7%]	74
Improvements ✅ (primary)	-	-	0
Improvements ✅ (secondary)	-	-	0
All ❌✅ (primary)	0.5%	[0.0%, 2.0%]	31

Bootstrap: 666.819s -> 669.852s (0.45%)
Artifact size: 315.68 MiB -> 315.91 MiB (0.07%)

the8472 · 2024-03-31T23:01:33Z

The layout code itself barely even shows up in cachegrind diffs. So I assume that the regressions are due to LLVM doing more work or worse codegen.

Perhaps it is better after all to give expanding the already-existing niche in references another try. That'll have to be a target-dependent optimization though.

rustbot assigned cjgillot Oct 8, 2023

rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Oct 8, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

the8472 mentioned this pull request Oct 8, 2023

Guarantee representation of None in NPO #115333

Merged

RalfJung reviewed Oct 8, 2023

View reviewed changes

nnethercote reviewed Oct 8, 2023

View reviewed changes

the8472 marked this pull request as draft October 8, 2023 22:50

cjgillot added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Nov 4, 2023

the8472 force-pushed the slice-ref-len-validity branch from f18bdd5 to 9fb9beb Compare March 24, 2024 00:43

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

the8472 mentioned this pull request Mar 24, 2024

Add assumes to slice length calls #122926

Closed

the8472 force-pushed the slice-ref-len-validity branch from 9fb9beb to dc27f9d Compare March 24, 2024 21:24

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

the8472 force-pushed the slice-ref-len-validity branch from dc27f9d to e47adf2 Compare March 24, 2024 22:30

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Add range information to slice metadata for types that are known to n…

c054bbc

…ot be ZST

the8472 force-pushed the slice-ref-len-validity branch from e47adf2 to c054bbc Compare March 31, 2024 02:38

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Mar 31, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Mar 31, 2024

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add range metadata to slice lengths #116542

Add range metadata to slice lengths #116542

the8472 commented Oct 8, 2023

rustbot commented Oct 8, 2023

rustbot commented Oct 8, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

RalfJung commented Oct 8, 2023

RalfJung Oct 8, 2023

RalfJung Oct 8, 2023

RalfJung Oct 8, 2023

RalfJung Oct 8, 2023

the8472 commented Oct 8, 2023

nnethercote Oct 8, 2023

riking Mar 27, 2024 •

edited

the8472 commented Oct 8, 2023

RalfJung commented Oct 9, 2023 •

edited

cjgillot commented Oct 11, 2023

the8472 commented Oct 11, 2023

bors commented Dec 26, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

the8472 commented Mar 24, 2024

bors commented Mar 26, 2024

the8472 commented Mar 31, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Mar 31, 2024

bors commented Mar 31, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Mar 31, 2024

the8472 commented Mar 31, 2024 •

edited

Add range metadata to slice lengths #116542

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Add range metadata to slice lengths #116542

Conversation

the8472 commented Oct 8, 2023

rustbot commented Oct 8, 2023

rustbot commented Oct 8, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

RalfJung commented Oct 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

the8472 commented Oct 8, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

riking Mar 27, 2024 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

the8472 commented Oct 8, 2023

RalfJung commented Oct 9, 2023 • edited

cjgillot commented Oct 11, 2023

the8472 commented Oct 11, 2023

bors commented Dec 26, 2023

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

This comment has been minimized.

the8472 commented Mar 24, 2024

bors commented Mar 26, 2024

the8472 commented Mar 31, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

bors commented Mar 31, 2024

bors commented Mar 31, 2024

This comment has been minimized.

rust-timer commented Mar 31, 2024

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

the8472 commented Mar 31, 2024 • edited

riking Mar 27, 2024 •

edited

RalfJung commented Oct 9, 2023 •

edited

the8472 commented Mar 31, 2024 •

edited