Skip to content

Toggle assert_unsafe_precondition in codegen instead of expansion#120594

Merged
bors merged 10 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
saethlin:delayed-debug-asserts
Feb 9, 2024
Merged

Toggle assert_unsafe_precondition in codegen instead of expansion#120594
bors merged 10 commits intorust-lang:masterfrom
saethlin:delayed-debug-asserts

Conversation

@saethlin
Copy link
Member

@saethlin saethlin commented Feb 2, 2024

The goal of this PR is to make some of the unsafe precondition checks in the standard library available in debug builds. Some UI tests are included to verify that it does that.

The diff is large, but most of it is blessing mir-opt tests and I've also split up this PR so it can be reviewed commit-by-commit.

This PR:

  1. Adds a new intrinsic, debug_assertions which is lowered to a new MIR NullOp, and only to a constant after monomorphization
  2. Rewrites assume_unsafe_precondition to check the new intrinsic, and be monomorphic.
  3. Skips codegen of the assume intrinsic in unoptimized builds, because that was silly before but with these checks it's very silly
  4. The checks with the most overhead are ptr::read/ptr::write and NonNull::new_unchecked. I've simply added #[cfg(debug_assertions)] to the checks for ptr::read/ptr::write because I was unable to come up with any (good) ideas for decreasing their impact. But for NonNull::new_unchecked I found that the majority of callers can use a different function, often a safe one.

Yes, this PR slows down the compile time of some programs. But in our benchmark suite it's never more than 1% icount, and the average icount change in debug-full programs is 0.22%. I think that is acceptable for such an improvement in developer experience.

#120539 (comment)

@rustbot rustbot added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. labels Feb 2, 2024
@rust-log-analyzer

This comment has been minimized.

@saethlin saethlin added S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Feb 3, 2024
@saethlin
Copy link
Member Author

saethlin commented Feb 3, 2024

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Feb 3, 2024
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2024
Toggle assert_unsafe_precondition in codegen instead of expansion

r? `@ghost`

rust-lang#120539 (comment)
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 3, 2024

⌛ Trying commit 6dd581b with merge 919a9f5...

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 3, 2024

💥 Test timed out

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. and removed S-waiting-on-author Status: This is awaiting some action (such as code changes or more information) from the author. labels Feb 3, 2024
@saethlin
Copy link
Member Author

saethlin commented Feb 3, 2024

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@saethlin
Copy link
Member Author

saethlin commented Feb 3, 2024

@bors retry

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 3, 2024

⌛ Trying commit 6dd581b with merge 4ec6b4e...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2024
Toggle assert_unsafe_precondition in codegen instead of expansion

r? `@ghost`

rust-lang#120539 (comment)
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 3, 2024

☀️ Try build successful - checks-actions
Build commit: 4ec6b4e (4ec6b4eea2432e96b694a0b73a6a5a664e3ff17c)

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rust-timer
Copy link
Collaborator

Finished benchmarking commit (4ec6b4e): comparison URL.

Overall result: ❌✅ regressions and improvements - ACTION NEEDED

Benchmarking this pull request likely means that it is perf-sensitive, so we're automatically marking it as not fit for rolling up. While you can manually mark this PR as fit for rollup, we strongly recommend not doing so since this PR may lead to changes in compiler perf.

Next Steps: If you can justify the regressions found in this try perf run, please indicate this with @rustbot label: +perf-regression-triaged along with sufficient written justification. If you cannot justify the regressions please fix the regressions and do another perf run. If the next run shows neutral or positive results, the label will be automatically removed.

@bors rollup=never
@rustbot label: -S-waiting-on-perf +perf-regression

Instruction count

This is a highly reliable metric that was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
2.0% [0.2%, 9.4%] 111
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
2.6% [0.3%, 36.6%] 39
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-0.7% [-0.8%, -0.5%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-0.6% [-1.3%, -0.3%] 9
All ❌✅ (primary) 1.9% [-0.8%, 9.4%] 114

Max RSS (memory usage)

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
5.5% [1.6%, 8.9%] 12
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.3% [2.5%, 6.4%] 4
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.2% [-1.5%, -1.0%] 3
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-2.7% [-3.3%, -2.1%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) 4.1% [-1.5%, 8.9%] 15

Cycles

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
3.4% [1.1%, 9.0%] 58
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
8.4% [2.0%, 36.0%] 9
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-2.4% [-2.4%, -2.4%] 1
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-3.8% [-7.0%, -0.9%] 7
All ❌✅ (primary) 3.3% [-2.4%, 9.0%] 59

Binary size

Results

This is a less reliable metric that may be of interest but was not used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment.

mean range count
Regressions ❌
(primary)
4.4% [0.2%, 9.3%] 95
Regressions ❌
(secondary)
4.5% [0.2%, 33.6%] 28
Improvements ✅
(primary)
-1.1% [-3.9%, -0.1%] 18
Improvements ✅
(secondary)
-1.0% [-2.0%, -0.0%] 2
All ❌✅ (primary) 3.5% [-3.9%, 9.3%] 113

Bootstrap: 662.752s -> 669.21s (0.97%)
Artifact size: 308.09 MiB -> 307.83 MiB (-0.08%)

@rustbot rustbot added perf-regression Performance regression. and removed S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. labels Feb 3, 2024
@saethlin
Copy link
Member Author

saethlin commented Feb 3, 2024

The few improvements are probably because the precondition checks are always kept in MIR, so we do less MIR inlining generally, and in some cases that happens to help.

Now I'm going to try to find the precondition checks that I think are least profitable and make those get toggled early.

@saethlin
Copy link
Member Author

saethlin commented Feb 3, 2024

@bors try @rust-timer queue

@rust-timer

This comment has been minimized.

@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-perf Status: Waiting on a perf run to be completed. label Feb 3, 2024
@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Feb 3, 2024

⌛ Trying commit 3ef4a60 with merge 4da3573...

bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2024
Toggle assert_unsafe_precondition in codegen instead of expansion

r? `@ghost`

rust-lang#120539 (comment)
bb1: {
+ StorageLive(_4);
+ _4 = cfg!(debug_assertions);
+ assume(_4);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So it's expected that it doesn't directly convert to unreachable here, right?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I didn't notice the associated comments. This is for the standard library. :)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

A-testsuite Area: The testsuite used to check the correctness of rustc merged-by-bors This PR was explicitly merged by bors. perf-regression Performance regression. perf-regression-triaged The performance regression has been triaged. relnotes Marks issues that should be documented in the release notes of the next release. S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-bootstrap Relevant to the bootstrap subteam: Rust's build system (x.py and src/bootstrap) T-compiler Relevant to the compiler team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. T-libs Relevant to the library team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.

Projects

None yet