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

Devirtualization with multiple guesses: JIT #86809

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Jun 1, 2023
Merged

Conversation

EgorBo
Copy link
Member

@EgorBo EgorBo commented May 26, 2023

Contributes to #86769

This PR enables GDV with multiple candidates for JIT. (#86551 did the initial infra and enabled that for NativeAOT)
Example:

public interface IValue
{
    int GetValue();
}

public class MyClass1 : IValue
{
    public int GetValue() => 10;
}

public class MyClass2 : IValue
{
    public int GetValue() => 50;
}

public class MyClass3 : IValue
{
    public int GetValue() => 100;
}

public class Program
{
    public static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        for (int i = 0; i < 200; i++)
        {
            Test(new MyClass1()); // MyClass1 has the highest likelihood
            Test(new MyClass1());
            Test(new MyClass2());
            Test(new MyClass3());
            Thread.Sleep(16);
        }
    }

    [MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.NoInlining)]
    static int Test(IValue value) => value.GetValue();
}

JIT's codegen for Test:

; Assembly listing for method Program:Test(IValue):int
       sub      rsp, 40
       mov      rax, 0x7FFBDC9C2000
       cmp      qword ptr [rcx], rax   ;; is it MyClass1 (50%) ?
       jne      SHORT G_M7592_IG04
       mov      eax, 10
       jmp      SHORT G_M7592_IG07
G_M7592_IG04:
       mov      rax, 0x7FFBDC9C21C8
       cmp      qword ptr [rcx], rax   ;; is it MyClass2 (25%) ?
       jne      SHORT G_M7592_IG06
       mov      eax, 50
       jmp      SHORT G_M7592_IG07
G_M7592_IG06:
       mov      rax, 0x7FFBDC9C2390
       cmp      qword ptr [rcx], rax   ;; is it MyClass3 (25%) ?
       jne      SHORT G_M7592_IG08
       mov      eax, 100
G_M7592_IG07:
       add      rsp, 40
       ret
G_M7592_IG08:
       mov      r11, 0x7FFBDC0C0048    ;; cold virtual fallback (0%)
       call     [r11]IValue:GetValue():int:this
       jmp      SHORT G_M7592_IG07
; Total bytes of code 88

I will keep the number of candidates to check just 1 (current behavior in Main) for JIT untill I implement all work items in #86769

@EgorBo EgorBo marked this pull request as draft May 26, 2023 19:03
@dotnet-issue-labeler dotnet-issue-labeler bot added the area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI label May 26, 2023
@ghost ghost assigned EgorBo May 26, 2023
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 26, 2023

Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT, @jakobbotsch
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

Issue Details

This PR enables GDV with multiple candidates for JIT. (did the initial infra and enabled that for NativeAOT)
Example:

public interface IValue
{
    int GetValue();
}

public class MyClass1 : IValue
{
    public int GetValue() => 10;
}

public class MyClass2 : IValue
{
    public int GetValue() => 50;
}

public class MyClass3 : IValue
{
    public int GetValue() => 100;
}

public class Program
{
    public static void Main(string[] args)
    {
        for (int i = 0; i < 200; i++)
        {
            Test(new MyClass1());
            Test(new MyClass1());
            Test(new MyClass2());
            Test(new MyClass3());
            Thread.Sleep(16);
        }
    }

    [MethodImpl(MethodImplOptions.NoInlining)]
    static int Test(IValue value) => value.GetValue();
}

JIT's codegen for Test:

; Assembly listing for method Program:Test(IValue):int
       sub      rsp, 40
       mov      r11, qword ptr [rcx]
       mov      rax, 0x7FFBC9FE9C28 ;; is it MyClass1?
       cmp      r11, rax
       jne      SHORT G_M7592_IG04
       mov      eax, 10
       jmp      SHORT G_M7592_IG09
G_M7592_IG04:  
       mov      rax, 0x7FFBC9FE9DF0 ;; is it MyClass2?
       cmp      r11, rax
       jne      SHORT G_M7592_IG06
       mov      eax, 50
       jmp      SHORT G_M7592_IG09
G_M7592_IG06:  
       mov      rax, 0x7FFBC9FE9FB8 ;; is it MyClass3?
       cmp      r11, rax
       jne      SHORT G_M7592_IG08
       mov      eax, 100
       jmp      SHORT G_M7592_IG09
G_M7592_IG08:  
       mov      r11, 0x7FFBC9400310 ;; virtual fallback
       call     [r11]IValue:GetValue():int:this
G_M7592_IG09:  
       nop      
       add      rsp, 40
       ret      
; Total bytes of code 92

I will keep the number of candidates to check just 1 (current behavior in Main) for JIT untill I implement all work items in #86769

Author: EgorBo
Assignees: EgorBo
Labels:

area-CodeGen-coreclr

Milestone: -

@EgorBo
Copy link
Member Author

EgorBo commented May 26, 2023

/azp run runtime-coreclr pgo, runtime-coreclr pgostress, runtime-coreclr libraries-pgo

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 3 pipeline(s).

@EgorBo
Copy link
Member Author

EgorBo commented May 26, 2023

/azp run runtime-coreclr pgo, runtime-coreclr pgostress

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s).

@EgorBo EgorBo marked this pull request as ready for review May 26, 2023 21:26
@EgorBo
Copy link
Member Author

EgorBo commented May 26, 2023

/azp run runtime-coreclr pgo, runtime-coreclr pgostress

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s).

@EgorBo EgorBo requested review from jakobbotsch and AndyAyersMS May 27, 2023 00:02
@EgorBo
Copy link
Member Author

EgorBo commented May 27, 2023

@AndyAyersMS @jakobbotsch PTAL, passes all the tests. I'm going to revert the default number of candidates back to 1 (and enable multiple candidates for pgostress only) - just wanted to make sure it passes CI tests.

NOTE: I recommend to review with "Hide whitespaces" option enabled.

@EgorBo
Copy link
Member Author

EgorBo commented May 27, 2023

/azp run runtime-coreclr pgo, runtime-coreclr pgostress

@azure-pipelines
Copy link

Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s).

@EgorBo
Copy link
Member Author

EgorBo commented May 28, 2023

Stats for the minimal-api (TodosApp) NativeAOT + Exact classes:
829 calls are expanded with 2 or 3 type checks
+80.5Kb size regression (+0.3% size increase) - doesn't look bad for 26.6Mb app

@EgorBo
Copy link
Member Author

EgorBo commented May 30, 2023

PTAL @AndyAyersMS, this also fixed a JitDump-only assert

}
else
{
// We're allowed to make more than 2 guesses - pick all types with likelihood >= 10%
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Note with an 8 entry reservoir the smallest value we'll ever see is 12.5%.

Copy link
Member Author

@EgorBo EgorBo May 31, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I assume it's an implementation detail JIT doesn't have to know, right? (and we might change it) Do you want me to change it to 12.5?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, just pointing out that currently you may never see a candidate that will fail this test.

Ultimately, we might want to compute the conditional probability. Say there are two candidates with likelihoods of 90 and 9. If the target is not the first candidate, the conditional probability of it being the second candidate is now 90%. (and if there was a third that was say 0.9, if it was not the first two, it is 90% likely to be that third one).

But to do this, we'd have to have more confidence in those low likelihoods.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Btw, with the current logic, the 10% threshold is likely be ignored for anything more complicated than a simple method because inliner will fine it for too low block weight


if (IsChainingSupported())
{
call->SetIsGuarded();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't understand this change

Copy link
Member Author

@EgorBo EgorBo May 31, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@AndyAyersMS it's a theoretical case. IsGuarded is only used for GDV chaining. Imagine we have:

obj.Call1();
obj.Call2();

and Call1() is expanded using 2 classes and chaining is disabled (since it only works with a single candidate). Call2() is expanded with just 1 class - it will try to "chain" with the previous Call1 that doesn't support chaining.

PS: this PR is zero diffs, it doesn't yet enable multiple GDV

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are you sure? I think IsGuarded is currently just used to annotate the inlining tree and inline XML. It means that a callee was GDV and we now decided to test for it and inline it. So I think you can just call it always here.

The inline tree and XML will get confused when one call site expands to multiple candidates. We should think about how we want to express something like multi-guess GDV for those situations. But that can wait.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You're right, I've reverted that change as it's not needed


if (IsChainingSupported())
{
call->SetIsGuarded();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ditto here

if ((inlineInfo != nullptr) && (inlineInfo->exactContextHnd != nullptr))
{
printf(" (exactContextHnd=0x%p)", dspPtr(inlineInfo->exactContextHnd));
}
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

These changes are JitDump only, gtDispTree was not aware that a call might have more than a single candidate.

@EgorBo
Copy link
Member Author

EgorBo commented Jun 1, 2023

@EgorBo EgorBo merged commit 89c96dc into dotnet:main Jun 1, 2023
@EgorBo EgorBo deleted the multiple-gdv-jit branch June 1, 2023 22:36
@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Jul 2, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
area-CodeGen-coreclr CLR JIT compiler in src/coreclr/src/jit and related components such as SuperPMI
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants