thr3ads.net - llvm dev - [llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows target) [Jan 2020]

If this information is useful, please help other people find it:
Share via:

Reid Kleckner via llvm-dev

2020-Jan-14 20:44 UTC

[llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

I think the simplest, most complete, short term fix, would be to call
llvm::colorEHFunclets, and to have the relevant instrumentation passes
apply the appropriate funclet bundle when inserting function calls. It's
not elegant because it means every simple instrumentation pass that inserts
regular function calls (ASan, TSan, MSan, instrprof, etc) needs to be
funclet-aware. But, it will work, and the code isn't so bad.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:59 AM Chrulski, Christopher M <
christopher.m.chrulski at intel.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the link. I agree, looks like it's another instance of the
same
> class of problems. Since the compiler still requires funclet operand
> bundles, it sounds like one of the 3 options below will be required until a
> longer term project of eliminating them is available. Anybody have a strong
> preference?
>
> Chris
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 1:10 AM
> To: Chrulski, Christopher M <christopher.m.chrulski at intel.com>;
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> Cc: Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>
> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using
> -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows
> target)
>
> I think this is the same underlying issue as
> https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40320. CCing Reid, who's had a
> bunch of thoughts on this in the past.
>
> On 1/11/20, 10:25 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Chrulski, Christopher M
via
> llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org on behalf of
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     I've run into a bug with the LLVM backend that causes incorrect
code
> generation to happen when using -fprofile-generate on programs that contain
> C++ exception handling when building for Windows.
>
>     The problem occurs when the value profiling inserts function calls
> into exception handling blocks. The instrumentation inserts value profiling
> intrinsic calls, and these are subsequently lowered into target library
> calls. However, these library calls do not get a funclet operand bundle
> associated with them. This causes the Windows Exception Handling
> Preparation Pass to drop all the instructions within the exception handler
> starting from the PGO instrumentation call, and replace them with
> 'unreachable'. This is being done by the function
> removeImplausibleInstructions (WinEHPrepare.cpp).
>
>     A simple reproducer of the problem shown here which will lead to
> incorrect code on the method test::run(). In this example, the virtual
> function called from within the exception handler triggers the bug when
> using -fprofile-generate.
>
>       #include <stdexcept>
>       #include <iostream>
>
>       extern void may_throw(int);
>
>       class base {
>       public:
>         base() : x(0) {};
>         int get_x() const { return x; }
>         virtual void update() { x++; }
>         int x;
>       };
>
>       class derived : public base {
>       public:
>         derived() {}
>         virtual void update() { x--; }
>       };
>
>       class test {
>       public:
>         void run(base* b, int count) {
>           try {
>             for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
>               may_throw(i);
>           }
>           catch (std::exception& e) {
>             // Virtual function call in exception handler for value
> profiling.
>             b->update();
>           }
>         }
>       };
>
>       void run_test() {
>         test tester;
>         base *obj = new derived;
>         tester.run(obj, 100);
>         std::cout << "Value in obj (should be -1): "
<< obj->get_x() <<
> "\n";
>         if (obj->get_x() == -1)
>           std::cout << "test passed\n";
>         else
>           std::cout << "test failed\n";
>       }
>
>       int main() {
>         // Without PGO, test runs and prints result.
>         // With -fprofile-generate, program seg-faults without printing.
>         run_test();
>         return 0;
>       }
>
>       __attribute__((noinline))
>       void may_throw(int x) {
>         if (x > 10)
>           throw std::range_error("value out of range");
>       }
>
>
>     On Windows, build with: clang -O2 -fprofile-generate test.cpp
>
>     When profiling is enabled the program will seg fault without printing
> anything. Without the -fprofile-generate flag, the program will run
> successfully.
>
>     The compiler problem is as follows: Prior to the Windows Exception
> Handling Preparation Pass, the IR for the function "test::run"
contains the
> following:
>
>     19:                                               ; preds = %17
>       %20 = catchpad within %18 [%rtti.TypeDescriptor19*
> @"??_R0?AVexception at std@@@8", i32 8,
%"class.std::exception"** %6]
>       %21 = load i64, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
> @"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2),
align 8
>       %22 = add i64 %21, 1
>       store i64 %22, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
> @"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2),
align 8
>       %23 = bitcast %class.base* %1 to void (%class.base*)***
>       %24 = load void (%class.base*)**, void (%class.base*)*** %23, align
> 8, !tbaa !9
>       %25 = load void (%class.base*)*, void (%class.base*)** %24, align 8
>       %26 = ptrtoint void (%class.base*)* %25 to i64
>       call void @__llvm_profile_instrument_target(i64 %26, i8* bitcast ({
> i64, i64, i64*, i8*, i8*, i32, [2 x i16] }* @"__profd_?run at test
> @@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z" to i8*), i32 0)
>       call void %25(%class.base* %1) [ "funclet"(token %20) ]
>       call void @_CxxThrowException(i8* null, %eh.ThrowInfo* null) #15 [
> "funclet"(token %20) ]
>       unreachable
>
>     Following this pass, this IR has been replaced with the following,
> causing a breakage to the original program. This is occurring because the
> instrumentation function call,
"__llvm_profile_instrument_target", is not
> marked with the funclet operand bundle [ "funclet"(token %20) ].
>
>     19:                                               ; preds = %17
>       %20 = catchpad within %18 [%rtti.TypeDescriptor19*
> @"??_R0?AVexception at std@@@8", i32 8,
%"class.std::exception"** %6]
>       %21 = load i64, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
> @"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2),
align 8
>       %22 = add i64 %21, 1
>       store i64 %22, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
> @"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2),
align 8
>       unreachable
>
>
>     Possible solutions:
>       1) Avoid value profiling of calls within exception handling blocks
>         Pros: Solves the problem
>         Cons: Could lose some cases of value profiling, but since the
> exception code is not supposed to be the primary execution path, this
> should not be a significant performance issue.
>
>       2) Propagate the funclet information onto the value profiling
> intrinsics created. And then also propagate this info to the library
> routines these intrinsics get lowered into.
>           For indirect function calls, the funclet information can be
> copied from the original function call.
>           However, for MemIntrinsic call operand value profiling, these do
> not have funclet operand bundles attached to them by the front-end. (Not
> sure if it's possible to do because the interfaces that are used to
create
> these do not take operand bundles) Therefore, PGO would need to determine
> the appropriate funclet value with colorEHFunlets to identify the funclet
> operand bundle to attach to the instrumentation calls. Unfortunately,
> because it is possible that a basic block could be associated with multiple
> funclets or both a funclet and outside the funclet, this may also need to
> clone some of basic blocks similar to the WinEHPrepare.cpp routine
> cloneCommonBlocks(), prior to computing the instrumentation.
>
>         Pros: does not disable value profiling opportunities.
>         Cons: complex to implement due to the need to determine the
> appropriate funclet to place on the memory operand value profiling calls.
> This would necessitate the same cloning behavior to be done for the PGO use
> compilation.
>
>       3) Teach the Windows Exception Preparation Pass about the value
> profiling library functions. Currently this pass will ignore llvm intrinsic
> functions that are marked with the 'does not throw' attribute, but
the
> value profiling intrinsic calls have been lowered from being intrinsic
> calls into runtime library target specific functions before reaching this
> point.
>
>         Pros: does not disable value profiling opportunities
>         Cons: requires exposing function names from InstrProf.h to the
> WinEHPrepare.cpp file, or requires a new attribute on the function calls to
> identify them as instrumentation library calls. Also, the IR does not
> correctly reflect the correct state regarding the operand bundle funclet
> information for the PGO inserted function calls.
>
>     For options 2 or 3 to work, it also requires that the PGO indirect
> function call promotion pass used for -fprofile-use to maintain the
> 'funclet' operand bundle on the specialized function call that is
inserted
> as a direct function call target. Fortunately, the code within that pass is
> cloning the original indirect call, so the 'funclet' operand bundle
is
> being maintained on it.
>
>     Any thoughts on which of these options should be taken, or other
> suggestions for resolving this problem?
>
>
>     Chris
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     LLVM Developers mailing list
>     llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
>
>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=IHHZpUcEfZDvndGY8yafot6m6x5pu5ytT0d-lHiPtj4&s=G_7nV5L14eMSueKjWv77SYDeHf7Jzl5s0TrkM7l3YRM&e>
>
>-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200114/0929787a/attachment.html>

Shoaib Meenai via llvm-dev

2020-Jan-14 21:48 UTC

head link

[llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

https://reviews.llvm.org/D44641 is an example of using colorEHFunclets this way
(and https://reviews.llvm.org/D45857 is a follow-up which demonstrates another
usage). If I remember correctly, the analysis needs to be updated if the pass is
updating the CFG, which those ARC passes weren’t doing. I’m not sure what that
updating looks like, though I’m sure we have an example of it somewhere in-tree
… Reid might know off the top of his head.

From: Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>
Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 12:45 PM
To: "Chrulski, Christopher M" <christopher.m.chrulski at
intel.com>
Cc: Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com>, "llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org" <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate
on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

I think the simplest, most complete, short term fix, would be to call
llvm::colorEHFunclets, and to have the relevant instrumentation passes apply the
appropriate funclet bundle when inserting function calls. It's not elegant
because it means every simple instrumentation pass that inserts regular function
calls (ASan, TSan, MSan, instrprof, etc) needs to be funclet-aware. But, it will
work, and the code isn't so bad.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:59 AM Chrulski, Christopher M
<christopher.m.chrulski at intel.com<mailto:christopher.m.chrulski at
intel.com>> wrote:
Thanks for the link. I agree, looks like it's another instance of the same
class of problems. Since the compiler still requires funclet operand bundles, it
sounds like one of the 3 options below will be required until a longer term
project of eliminating them is available. Anybody have a strong preference?

Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com<mailto:smeenai at fb.com>>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 1:10 AM
To: Chrulski, Christopher M <christopher.m.chrulski at
intel.com<mailto:christopher.m.chrulski at intel.com>>; llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Cc: Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com<mailto:rnk at google.com>>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate
on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

I think this is the same underlying issue as
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40320<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.llvm.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D40320&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=2kJvP66PH1_0V_6F0MmFxRneQh7gCOtMlcJ05vyhwho&s=IQa4LvJ69syknBZI4oGapryXiISJwyjSHUW8YjtIJfo&e=>.
CCing Reid, who's had a bunch of thoughts on this in the past.

On 1/11/20, 10:25 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Chrulski, Christopher M via
llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev-bounces
at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev
at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:

    Hi,

    I've run into a bug with the LLVM backend that causes incorrect code
generation to happen when using -fprofile-generate on programs that contain C++
exception handling when building for Windows.

    The problem occurs when the value profiling inserts function calls into
exception handling blocks. The instrumentation inserts value profiling intrinsic
calls, and these are subsequently lowered into target library calls. However,
these library calls do not get a funclet operand bundle associated with them.
This causes the Windows Exception Handling Preparation Pass to drop all the
instructions within the exception handler starting from the PGO instrumentation
call, and replace them with 'unreachable'. This is being done by the
function removeImplausibleInstructions (WinEHPrepare.cpp).

    A simple reproducer of the problem shown here which will lead to incorrect
code on the method test::run(). In this example, the virtual function called
from within the exception handler triggers the bug when using
-fprofile-generate.

      #include <stdexcept>
      #include <iostream>

      extern void may_throw(int);

      class base {
      public:
        base() : x(0) {};
        int get_x() const { return x; }
        virtual void update() { x++; }
        int x;
      };

      class derived : public base {
      public:
        derived() {}
        virtual void update() { x--; }
      };

      class test {
      public:
        void run(base* b, int count) {
          try {
            for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
              may_throw(i);
          }
          catch (std::exception& e) {
            // Virtual function call in exception handler for value profiling.
            b->update();
          }
        }
      };

      void run_test() {
        test tester;
        base *obj = new derived;
        tester.run(obj, 100);
        std::cout << "Value in obj (should be -1): " <<
obj->get_x() << "\n";
        if (obj->get_x() == -1)
          std::cout << "test passed\n";
        else
          std::cout << "test failed\n";
      }

      int main() {
        // Without PGO, test runs and prints result.
        // With -fprofile-generate, program seg-faults without printing.
        run_test();
        return 0;
      }

      __attribute__((noinline))
      void may_throw(int x) {
        if (x > 10)
          throw std::range_error("value out of range");
      }


    On Windows, build with: clang -O2 -fprofile-generate test.cpp

    When profiling is enabled the program will seg fault without printing
anything. Without the -fprofile-generate flag, the program will run
successfully.

    The compiler problem is as follows: Prior to the Windows Exception Handling
Preparation Pass, the IR for the function "test::run" contains the
following:

    19:                                               ; preds = %17
      %20 = catchpad within %18 [%rtti.TypeDescriptor19*
@"??_R0?AVexception at std@@@8", i32 8,
%"class.std::exception"** %6]
      %21 = load i64, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
@"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2), align 8
      %22 = add i64 %21, 1
      store i64 %22, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
@"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2), align 8
      %23 = bitcast %class.base* %1 to void (%class.base*)***
      %24 = load void (%class.base*)**, void (%class.base*)*** %23, align 8,
!tbaa !9
      %25 = load void (%class.base*)*, void (%class.base*)** %24, align 8
      %26 = ptrtoint void (%class.base*)* %25 to i64
      call void @__llvm_profile_instrument_target(i64 %26, i8* bitcast ({ i64,
i64, i64*, i8*, i8*, i32, [2 x i16] }* @"__profd_?run at
test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z" to i8*), i32 0)
      call void %25(%class.base* %1) [ "funclet"(token %20) ]
      call void @_CxxThrowException(i8* null, %eh.ThrowInfo* null) #15 [
"funclet"(token %20) ]
      unreachable

    Following this pass, this IR has been replaced with the following, causing a
breakage to the original program. This is occurring because the instrumentation
function call, "__llvm_profile_instrument_target", is not marked with
the funclet operand bundle [ "funclet"(token %20) ].

    19:                                               ; preds = %17
      %20 = catchpad within %18 [%rtti.TypeDescriptor19*
@"??_R0?AVexception at std@@@8", i32 8,
%"class.std::exception"** %6]
      %21 = load i64, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
@"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2), align 8
      %22 = add i64 %21, 1
      store i64 %22, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
@"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2), align 8
      unreachable


    Possible solutions:
      1) Avoid value profiling of calls within exception handling blocks
        Pros: Solves the problem
        Cons: Could lose some cases of value profiling, but since the exception
code is not supposed to be the primary execution path, this should not be a
significant performance issue.

      2) Propagate the funclet information onto the value profiling intrinsics
created. And then also propagate this info to the library routines these
intrinsics get lowered into.
          For indirect function calls, the funclet information can be copied
from the original function call.
          However, for MemIntrinsic call operand value profiling, these do not
have funclet operand bundles attached to them by the front-end. (Not sure if
it's possible to do because the interfaces that are used to create these do
not take operand bundles) Therefore, PGO would need to determine the appropriate
funclet value with colorEHFunlets to identify the funclet operand bundle to
attach to the instrumentation calls. Unfortunately, because it is possible that
a basic block could be associated with multiple funclets or both a funclet and
outside the funclet, this may also need to clone some of basic blocks similar to
the WinEHPrepare.cpp routine cloneCommonBlocks(), prior to computing the
instrumentation.

        Pros: does not disable value profiling opportunities.
        Cons: complex to implement due to the need to determine the appropriate
funclet to place on the memory operand value profiling calls. This would
necessitate the same cloning behavior to be done for the PGO use compilation.

      3) Teach the Windows Exception Preparation Pass about the value profiling
library functions. Currently this pass will ignore llvm intrinsic functions that
are marked with the 'does not throw' attribute, but the value profiling
intrinsic calls have been lowered from being intrinsic calls into runtime
library target specific functions before reaching this point.

        Pros: does not disable value profiling opportunities
        Cons: requires exposing function names from InstrProf.h to the
WinEHPrepare.cpp file, or requires a new attribute on the function calls to
identify them as instrumentation library calls. Also, the IR does not correctly
reflect the correct state regarding the operand bundle funclet information for
the PGO inserted function calls.

    For options 2 or 3 to work, it also requires that the PGO indirect function
call promotion pass used for -fprofile-use to maintain the 'funclet'
operand bundle on the specialized function call that is inserted as a direct
function call target. Fortunately, the code within that pass is cloning the
original indirect call, so the 'funclet' operand bundle is being
maintained on it.

    Any thoughts on which of these options should be taken, or other suggestions
for resolving this problem?


    Chris


    _______________________________________________
    LLVM Developers mailing list
    llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
   
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=IHHZpUcEfZDvndGY8yafot6m6x5pu5ytT0d-lHiPtj4&s=G_7nV5L14eMSueKjWv77SYDeHf7Jzl5s0TrkM7l3YRM&e
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200114/e30ca687/attachment-0001.html>

Chrulski, Christopher M via llvm-dev

2020-Jan-15 03:38 UTC

head link

[llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

Thanks. I’ll take a look at the examples and give it a try for creating a patch.

Chris

From: Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 2:49 PM
To: Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com>; Chrulski, Christopher M
<christopher.m.chrulski at intel.com>
Cc: llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate
on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

https://reviews.llvm.org/D44641 is an example of using colorEHFunclets this way
(and https://reviews.llvm.org/D45857 is a follow-up which demonstrates another
usage). If I remember correctly, the analysis needs to be updated if the pass is
updating the CFG, which those ARC passes weren’t doing. I’m not sure what that
updating looks like, though I’m sure we have an example of it somewhere in-tree
… Reid might know off the top of his head.

From: Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com<mailto:rnk at google.com>>
Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 at 12:45 PM
To: "Chrulski, Christopher M" <christopher.m.chrulski at
intel.com<mailto:christopher.m.chrulski at intel.com>>
Cc: Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com<mailto:smeenai at fb.com>>,
"llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>"
<llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate
on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

I think the simplest, most complete, short term fix, would be to call
llvm::colorEHFunclets, and to have the relevant instrumentation passes apply the
appropriate funclet bundle when inserting function calls. It's not elegant
because it means every simple instrumentation pass that inserts regular function
calls (ASan, TSan, MSan, instrprof, etc) needs to be funclet-aware. But, it will
work, and the code isn't so bad.

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 10:59 AM Chrulski, Christopher M
<christopher.m.chrulski at intel.com<mailto:christopher.m.chrulski at
intel.com>> wrote:
Thanks for the link. I agree, looks like it's another instance of the same
class of problems. Since the compiler still requires funclet operand bundles, it
sounds like one of the 3 options below will be required until a longer term
project of eliminating them is available. Anybody have a strong preference?

Chris


-----Original Message-----
From: Shoaib Meenai <smeenai at fb.com<mailto:smeenai at fb.com>>
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2020 1:10 AM
To: Chrulski, Christopher M <christopher.m.chrulski at
intel.com<mailto:christopher.m.chrulski at intel.com>>; llvm-dev at
lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Cc: Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com<mailto:rnk at google.com>>
Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate
on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

I think this is the same underlying issue as
https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=40320<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__bugs.llvm.org_show-5Fbug.cgi-3Fid-3D40320&d=DwMFaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=2kJvP66PH1_0V_6F0MmFxRneQh7gCOtMlcJ05vyhwho&s=IQa4LvJ69syknBZI4oGapryXiISJwyjSHUW8YjtIJfo&e=>.
CCing Reid, who's had a bunch of thoughts on this in the past.

On 1/11/20, 10:25 AM, "llvm-dev on behalf of Chrulski, Christopher M via
llvm-dev" <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev-bounces
at lists.llvm.org> on behalf of llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev
at lists.llvm.org>> wrote:

    Hi,

    I've run into a bug with the LLVM backend that causes incorrect code
generation to happen when using -fprofile-generate on programs that contain C++
exception handling when building for Windows.

    The problem occurs when the value profiling inserts function calls into
exception handling blocks. The instrumentation inserts value profiling intrinsic
calls, and these are subsequently lowered into target library calls. However,
these library calls do not get a funclet operand bundle associated with them.
This causes the Windows Exception Handling Preparation Pass to drop all the
instructions within the exception handler starting from the PGO instrumentation
call, and replace them with 'unreachable'. This is being done by the
function removeImplausibleInstructions (WinEHPrepare.cpp).

    A simple reproducer of the problem shown here which will lead to incorrect
code on the method test::run(). In this example, the virtual function called
from within the exception handler triggers the bug when using
-fprofile-generate.

      #include <stdexcept>
      #include <iostream>

      extern void may_throw(int);

      class base {
      public:
        base() : x(0) {};
        int get_x() const { return x; }
        virtual void update() { x++; }
        int x;
      };

      class derived : public base {
      public:
        derived() {}
        virtual void update() { x--; }
      };

      class test {
      public:
        void run(base* b, int count) {
          try {
            for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i)
              may_throw(i);
          }
          catch (std::exception& e) {
            // Virtual function call in exception handler for value profiling.
            b->update();
          }
        }
      };

      void run_test() {
        test tester;
        base *obj = new derived;
        tester.run(obj, 100);
        std::cout << "Value in obj (should be -1): " <<
obj->get_x() << "\n";
        if (obj->get_x() == -1)
          std::cout << "test passed\n";
        else
          std::cout << "test failed\n";
      }

      int main() {
        // Without PGO, test runs and prints result.
        // With -fprofile-generate, program seg-faults without printing.
        run_test();
        return 0;
      }

      __attribute__((noinline))
      void may_throw(int x) {
        if (x > 10)
          throw std::range_error("value out of range");
      }


    On Windows, build with: clang -O2 -fprofile-generate test.cpp

    When profiling is enabled the program will seg fault without printing
anything. Without the -fprofile-generate flag, the program will run
successfully.

    The compiler problem is as follows: Prior to the Windows Exception Handling
Preparation Pass, the IR for the function "test::run" contains the
following:

    19:                                               ; preds = %17
      %20 = catchpad within %18 [%rtti.TypeDescriptor19*
@"??_R0?AVexception at std@@@8", i32 8,
%"class.std::exception"** %6]
      %21 = load i64, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
@"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2), align 8
      %22 = add i64 %21, 1
      store i64 %22, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
@"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2), align 8
      %23 = bitcast %class.base* %1 to void (%class.base*)***
      %24 = load void (%class.base*)**, void (%class.base*)*** %23, align 8,
!tbaa !9
      %25 = load void (%class.base*)*, void (%class.base*)** %24, align 8
      %26 = ptrtoint void (%class.base*)* %25 to i64
      call void @__llvm_profile_instrument_target(i64 %26, i8* bitcast ({ i64,
i64, i64*, i8*, i8*, i32, [2 x i16] }* @"__profd_?run at
test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z" to i8*), i32 0)
      call void %25(%class.base* %1) [ "funclet"(token %20) ]
      call void @_CxxThrowException(i8* null, %eh.ThrowInfo* null) #15 [
"funclet"(token %20) ]
      unreachable

    Following this pass, this IR has been replaced with the following, causing a
breakage to the original program. This is occurring because the instrumentation
function call, "__llvm_profile_instrument_target", is not marked with
the funclet operand bundle [ "funclet"(token %20) ].

    19:                                               ; preds = %17
      %20 = catchpad within %18 [%rtti.TypeDescriptor19*
@"??_R0?AVexception at std@@@8", i32 8,
%"class.std::exception"** %6]
      %21 = load i64, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
@"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2), align 8
      %22 = add i64 %21, 1
      store i64 %22, i64* getelementptr inbounds ([3 x i64], [3 x i64]*
@"__profc_?run at test@@QEAAXPEAVbase@@H at Z", i64 0, i64 2), align 8
      unreachable


    Possible solutions:
      1) Avoid value profiling of calls within exception handling blocks
        Pros: Solves the problem
        Cons: Could lose some cases of value profiling, but since the exception
code is not supposed to be the primary execution path, this should not be a
significant performance issue.

      2) Propagate the funclet information onto the value profiling intrinsics
created. And then also propagate this info to the library routines these
intrinsics get lowered into.
          For indirect function calls, the funclet information can be copied
from the original function call.
          However, for MemIntrinsic call operand value profiling, these do not
have funclet operand bundles attached to them by the front-end. (Not sure if
it's possible to do because the interfaces that are used to create these do
not take operand bundles) Therefore, PGO would need to determine the appropriate
funclet value with colorEHFunlets to identify the funclet operand bundle to
attach to the instrumentation calls. Unfortunately, because it is possible that
a basic block could be associated with multiple funclets or both a funclet and
outside the funclet, this may also need to clone some of basic blocks similar to
the WinEHPrepare.cpp routine cloneCommonBlocks(), prior to computing the
instrumentation.

        Pros: does not disable value profiling opportunities.
        Cons: complex to implement due to the need to determine the appropriate
funclet to place on the memory operand value profiling calls. This would
necessitate the same cloning behavior to be done for the PGO use compilation.

      3) Teach the Windows Exception Preparation Pass about the value profiling
library functions. Currently this pass will ignore llvm intrinsic functions that
are marked with the 'does not throw' attribute, but the value profiling
intrinsic calls have been lowered from being intrinsic calls into runtime
library target specific functions before reaching this point.

        Pros: does not disable value profiling opportunities
        Cons: requires exposing function names from InstrProf.h to the
WinEHPrepare.cpp file, or requires a new attribute on the function calls to
identify them as instrumentation library calls. Also, the IR does not correctly
reflect the correct state regarding the operand bundle funclet information for
the PGO inserted function calls.

    For options 2 or 3 to work, it also requires that the PGO indirect function
call promotion pass used for -fprofile-use to maintain the 'funclet'
operand bundle on the specialized function call that is inserted as a direct
function call target. Fortunately, the code within that pass is cloning the
original indirect call, so the 'funclet' operand bundle is being
maintained on it.

    Any thoughts on which of these options should be taken, or other suggestions
for resolving this problem?


    Chris


    _______________________________________________
    LLVM Developers mailing list
    llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org<mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
   
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.llvm.org_cgi-2Dbin_mailman_listinfo_llvm-2Ddev&d=DwIGaQ&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=o3kDXzdBUE3ljQXKeTWOMw&m=IHHZpUcEfZDvndGY8yafot6m6x5pu5ytT0d-lHiPtj4&s=G_7nV5L14eMSueKjWv77SYDeHf7Jzl5s0TrkM7l3YRM&e--------------
next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
<http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200115/20dd8db2/attachment.html>

llvm dev - Jan 2020 - Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

[llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

[llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)

[llvm-dev] Incorrect code generation when using -fprofile-generate on code which contains exception handling (Windows target)