-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.5k
[FieldSensitivePL] Fix vectorization. #66690
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
Conversation
d3a1e06
to
06e97db
Compare
Vars of such types should be given lexical `alloc_stack`s by `AllocBoxToStack` which requires that the `alloc_box` insts formed for them have an associated borrow scope which in turn requires that type lowering for move only structs and enums have their lexical bits set. rdar://110901430
According to language rules, such lifetimes are fixed and the relative order of their deinits is guaranteed. rdar://110913116
The members were declared but undefined.
Its storage vector is intended to be of some type like `std::vector<std::pair<Key, Optional<Value>>>`, i.e., some collection of pairs whose `second` is an `Optional<Value>`. So when constructing a default instance of that pair, just construct an Optional in the None case.
51caf52
to
7b03dea
Compare
7b03dea
to
47b72b4
Compare
FieldSensitivePrunedLiveness is used as a vectorization of PrunedLiveness. An instance of FSPL with N elements needs to be able to represent the same states as N instances of PL. Previously, it failed to do that in two significant ways: (1) It attempted to save space for which elements were live by using a range. This failed to account for instructions which are users of non-contiguous fields of an aggregate. apply( @owned (struct_element_addr %s, #S.f1), @owned (struct_element_addr %s, #S.f3) ) (2) It used a single bit to represent whether the instruction was consuming. This failed to account for instructions which consumed some fields and borrowed others. apply( @owned (struct_element_addr %s, #S.f1), @guaranteed (struct_element_addr %s, #S.f2) ) The fix for (1) is to use a bit vector to represent which elements are used by the instruction. The fix for (2) is to use a second bit vector to represent which elements are _consumed_ by the instruction. Adapted the move-checker to use the new representation. rdar://110909290
47b72b4
to
f4e3292
Compare
@swift-ci please test |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Awesome! I reviewed this for CCC.
if (!record) | ||
return kind == IsInterestingUser::NonUser; | ||
|
||
for (auto element : range.getRange()) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe a bitwise comparison could be used instead of iteration. I don't suggest doing that within this "bug fix" PR. But maybe we should have followup enhancement request and/or TODO.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
FieldSensitivePrunedLiveness is used as a vectorization of PrunedLiveness. An instance of FSPL with N elements needs to be able to represent the same states as N instances of PL.
Previously, it failed to do that in two significant ways:
(1) It attempted to save space for which elements were live by using a range. This failed to account for instructions which are users of non-contiguous fields of an aggregate.
(2) It used a single bit to represent whether the instruction was consuming. This failed to account for instructions which consumed some fields and borrowed others.
The fix for (1) is to use a bit vector to represent which elements are used by the instruction. The fix for (2) is to use a second bit vector to represent which elements are consumed by the instruction.
rdar://110909290