llvm dev - Mar 2007 - [LLVMdev] Live intervals and aliasing registers problem

While beginning to add vector registers to a back end I came across  
the following problem: as soon as I define two sets of registers that  
have a many-to-one mapping the live interval pass appears to double- 
kill the mapped-onto register. I have the following excerpts from my  
RegisterInfo.td.

def V4R0   : R4v<0 , "V4R0 ", []>, DwarfRegNum<0>;

def R0   : Rg<0 , "R0", [V4R0]>, DwarfRegNum<0>;
def R1   : Rg<1 , "R1", [V4R0]>, DwarfRegNum<1>;

when trying to compile:

define void @_Z3fooii(i32 %a, i32 %b) {
entry:
         %retval = select i1 false, i32 %a, i32 %b               ;  
<i32> [#uses=0]
         ret void
}

I get this error:

entry (0x8503b90, LLVM BB @0x8501b00, ID#0):
         %reg1024 = ORI %R0, 0
         %reg1025 = ORI %R1, 0
         RETL
Machine Function
********** REWRITING TWO-ADDR INSTRS **********
********** Function: _Z3fooff

********** COMPUTING LIVE INTERVALS **********
********** Function: _Z3fooii
entry:
                 livein register: R0 killed +[0,2:0)
                 livein register: V4R0  killed +[0,2:0)
                 livein register: R1 killed +[0,6:0)
                 livein register: V4R0  killed +[0,2:1)
lib/CodeGen/LiveInterval.cpp:189: failed assertion `B->end <= Start  
&& "Cannot overlap two LiveRanges with differing ValID's"
" (did you
def the same reg twice in a MachineInstr?)"'

The problem here is that both R0 and R1 alias to V4R0, but because  
the live-in interval analysis always starts with the first  
instruction in the function V4R0 gets the same live range for for  
both when R0 kills it and when R1, as the first instruction is  
responsible for the earliest kill in both cases. This presents a  
problem as the second kill of V4R0 is marked as a second value of  
V4R0 as well, which causes the assert above to fire.

Either V4R0 is never alive or after R0 is killed V4R0 is only  
partially dead. This same situation arises even when the parameters  
are not live-ins to the function, all it takes is two registers which  
alias a third to have overlapping live ranges, such as when the  
following code is compiled.

define void @_Z3foov() {
entry:
	%tmp1 = tail call float @_Z3onev( )		; <float> [#uses=2]
	%tmp2 = tail call float @_Z3twov( )		; <float> [#uses=2]
	%tmp5 = fcmp olt float %tmp1, %tmp2		; <i1> [#uses=1]
	%retval = select i1 %tmp5, float %tmp1, float %tmp2		; <float>  
[#uses=0]
	ret void
}

Does the fact that V4R0 is considered live-in mean I need to fix my  
target code, or does the live interval analysis need fixing to handle  
this corner case? Any guidance on how to approach this problem would  
be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
--
Christopher Lamb
christopher.lamb at gmail.com


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20070325/e606d1df/attachment.html>

On Mar 25, 2007, at 7:12 AM, Christopher Lamb wrote:
> While beginning to add vector registers to a back end I came across  
> the following problem: as soon as I define two sets of registers  
> that have a many-to-one mapping the live interval pass appears to  
> double-kill the mapped-onto register. I have the following excerpts  
> from my RegisterInfo.td.
>
> def V4R0   : R4v<0 , "V4R0 ", []>, DwarfRegNum<0>;
>
> def R0   : Rg<0 , "R0", [V4R0]>, DwarfRegNum<0>;
> def R1   : Rg<1 , "R1", [V4R0]>, DwarfRegNum<1>;
How are R4v and Rg defined?
>
> when trying to compile:
>
> define void @_Z3fooii(i32 %a, i32 %b) {
> entry:
>         %retval = select i1 false, i32 %a, i32 %b               ;  
> <i32> [#uses=0]
>         ret void
> }
>
> I get this error:
>
> entry (0x8503b90, LLVM BB @0x8501b00, ID#0):
>         %reg1024 = ORI %R0, 0
>         %reg1025 = ORI %R1, 0
>         RETL
> Machine Function
> ********** REWRITING TWO-ADDR INSTRS **********
> ********** Function: _Z3fooff
>
> ********** COMPUTING LIVE INTERVALS **********
> ********** Function: _Z3fooii
> entry:
>                 livein register: R0 killed +[0,2:0)
>                 livein register: V4R0  killed +[0,2:0)  <=== this  
> is bad
>                 livein register: R1 killed +[0,6:0)
>                 livein register: V4R0  killed +[0,2:1)
> lib/CodeGen/LiveInterval.cpp:189: failed assertion `B->end <= Start  
> && "Cannot overlap two LiveRanges with differing
ValID's" " (did
> you def the same reg twice in a MachineInstr?)"'
V4R0 should not have been killed twice. The second ORI instruction is  
the last use of V4R0. Are you adding the correct livein's (just R0  
and R1) to the function?

Can you dump out the machine basic block? It should have an implicit  
use of V4R0 at first ORI but it should not be marked kill. If it is  
marked kill, then you need to walk LiveVariables.cpp to find out why.

Evan

>
> The problem here is that both R0 and R1 alias to V4R0, but because  
> the live-in interval analysis always starts with the first  
> instruction in the function V4R0 gets the same live range for for  
> both when R0 kills it and when R1, as the first instruction is  
> responsible for the earliest kill in both cases. This presents a  
> problem as the second kill of V4R0 is marked as a second value of  
> V4R0 as well, which causes the assert above to fire.
>
> Either V4R0 is never alive or after R0 is killed V4R0 is only  
> partially dead. This same situation arises even when the parameters  
> are not live-ins to the function, all it takes is two registers  
> which alias a third to have overlapping live ranges, such as when  
> the following code is compiled.
>
> define void @_Z3foov() {
> entry:
> 	%tmp1 = tail call float @_Z3onev( )		; <float> [#uses=2]
> 	%tmp2 = tail call float @_Z3twov( )		; <float> [#uses=2]
> 	%tmp5 = fcmp olt float %tmp1, %tmp2		; <i1> [#uses=1]
> 	%retval = select i1 %tmp5, float %tmp1, float %tmp2		; <float>  
> [#uses=0]
> 	ret void
> }
>
> Does the fact that V4R0 is considered live-in mean I need to fix my  
> target code, or does the live interval analysis need fixing to  
> handle this corner case? Any guidance on how to approach this  
> problem would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Thanks
> --
> Christopher Lamb
> christopher.lamb at gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu         http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20070327/68dc2ff8/attachment.html>

On Mar 27, 2007, at 3:25 PM, Evan Cheng wrote:
>
> On Mar 25, 2007, at 7:12 AM, Christopher Lamb wrote:
>
>> While beginning to add vector registers to a back end I came  
>> across the following problem: as soon as I define two sets of  
>> registers that have a many-to-one mapping the live interval pass  
>> appears to double-kill the mapped-onto register. I have the  
>> following excerpts from my RegisterInfo.td.
>>
>> def V4R0   : R4v<0 , "V4R0 ", []>,
DwarfRegNum<0>;
>>
>> def R0   : Rg<0 , "R0", [V4R0]>, DwarfRegNum<0>;
>> def R1   : Rg<1 , "R1", [V4R0]>, DwarfRegNum<1>;
>
> How are R4v and Rg defined?
class Rg<bits<6> num, string n, list<Register> aliases> :
MyReg<n>
{
   let Num = num;
   let Aliases = aliases;
}

class R4v<bits<6> num, string n, list<Register> aliases> :
MyReg<n> {
   let Num = num;
   let Aliases = aliases;
}

>>
>> when trying to compile:
>>
>> define void @_Z3fooii(i32 %a, i32 %b) {
>> entry:
>>         %retval = select i1 false, i32 %a, i32 %b               ;  
>> <i32> [#uses=0]
>>         ret void
>> }
>>
>> I get this error:
>>
>> entry (0x8503b90, LLVM BB @0x8501b00, ID#0):
>>         %reg1024 = ORI %R0, 0
>>         %reg1025 = ORI %R1, 0
>>         RETL
>> Machine Function
>> ********** REWRITING TWO-ADDR INSTRS **********
>> ********** Function: _Z3fooff
>>
>> ********** COMPUTING LIVE INTERVALS **********
>> ********** Function: _Z3fooii
>> entry:
>>                 livein register: R0 killed +[0,2:0)
>>                 livein register: V4R0  killed +[0,2:0)  <=== this  
>> is bad
>>                 livein register: R1 killed +[0,6:0)
>>                 livein register: V4R0  killed +[0,2:1)
>> lib/CodeGen/LiveInterval.cpp:189: failed assertion `B->end <=  
>> Start && "Cannot overlap two LiveRanges with differing
ValID's"
>> " (did you def the same reg twice in a MachineInstr?)"'
>
> V4R0 should not have been killed twice. The second ORI instruction  
> is the last use of V4R0. Are you adding the correct livein's (just  
> R0 and R1) to the function?
Yes, only R0 and R1 are being added.
> Can you dump out the machine basic block? It should have an  
> implicit use of V4R0 at first ORI but it should not be marked kill.  
> If it is marked kill, then you need to walk LiveVariables.cpp to  
> find out why.
Here is the beginning of the BB dump.

entry (0x8503c80, LLVM BB @0x8501af0, ID#0):
Live Ins: %R0 %R1
	%reg1024 = ORI %R0<kill>, 0
	%reg1025 = ORI %R1<kill>, 0

V4R0 is getting killed because handleLiveInRegister() is called on  
all results of getAliasSet() for each of the liveins (this is in  
LiveIntervals::computeIntervals() ).

handleRegisterDef() does a similar thing where calls  
handlePhysicalRegisterDef() on all members of getAliasSet() returned  
for the def, which also triggers this problem.

Is it calling handle*() on the alias set of a register thats the  
culprit, or is it some mishandling in KillsRegister()?

Thanks
--
Christopher Lamb