Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
JIT: Avoid internal register allocation when possible for PUTARG_SPLIT - #76443
Conversation
We can almost always avoid allocating an internal register, which may be expensive if lr is picked since we cannot use thumb encoding for it. The only case where we need an internal register is when we have a source that is in a register, and we have a single taget register to place that conflicts with that source register. The to-stack copies then need an intermediate scratch register to avoid clobbering the source register.
jakobbotsch
commented
Sep 30, 2022
Should fix regression seen in #76017 (comment). |
ghost
commented
Sep 30, 2022
Tagging subscribers to this area: @JulieLeeMSFT, @jakobbotsch Issue DetailsWe can almost always avoid allocating an internal register, which may be expensive if lr is picked since we cannot use thumb encoding for it. The only case where we need an internal register is when we have a source that is in a register, and we have a single taget register to place that conflicts with that source register. The to-stack copies then need an intermediate scratch register to avoid clobbering the source register.
|
jakobbotsch
commented
Sep 30, 2022
cc @dotnet/jit-contrib PTAL @BruceForstall |
| } | ||
| } | ||
| // Find first register to place. If we are placing addrReg, then |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just that I understand, we basically pick the first register to place after addrReg and round robin back so addrReg is placed last?
For r0, r1, addrReg, r3, r4, we will place: r3, r4, r0, r1, addrReg?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If yes, can you call that out in comment with an example. Initially it was not clear to me, if that's what we meant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Exactly. I'll add a comment like you suggested.
| { | ||
| if (treeNode->GetRegNumByIdx(i) == addrReg) | ||
| { | ||
| firstRegToPlace = i + 1; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| firstRegToPlace = i + 1; | |
| firstRegToPlace = (i + 1) % treeNode->gtNumRegs; |
That way, you can remove the code from below loop:
if (curRegIndex == treeNode->gtNumRegs)
{
curRegIndex = 0;
structOffset = 0;
}There was a problem hiding this comment.
It still needs to be handled in below loop (since the loop there also increments curRegIndex). So I think I'll leave it as is.
We can almost always avoid allocating an internal register, which may be expensive if lr is picked since we cannot use thumb encoding for it.
The only case where we need an internal register is when we have a source that is in a register, and we have a single taget register to place that conflicts with that source register. The to-stack copies then need an intermediate scratch register to avoid clobbering the source register.