Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220511160319.1045812-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
 <20220905003732.752-1-mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr> <CAKwvOdnr_F9-voPj4cp2HG8=U32a8Hp1aLpynSQiKOrwe4txpQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAKwvOdnr_F9-voPj4cp2HG8=U32a8Hp1aLpynSQiKOrwe4txpQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Sep 2022 00:04:42 -0700
Message-ID: <CAKwvOd=PgVtCwjS=Z_iqqmWsQ=+HsnEnHX2LOjRPCYFoVhAZhA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/2] x86/asm/bitops: optimize ff{s,z} functions for
 constant expressions
To:     Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr>
Cc:     Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        llvm@lists.linux.dev, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
        Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>,
        Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>,
        Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@kernel.org>,
        Yury Norov <yury.norov@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Sep 6, 2022 at 11:26 AM Nick Desaulniers
<ndesaulniers@google.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Sep 4, 2022 at 5:38 PM Vincent Mailhol
> <mailhol.vincent@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
> >
> > The compilers provide some builtin expression equivalent to the ffs(),
> > __ffs() and ffz() functions of the kernel. The kernel uses optimized
> > assembly which produces better code than the builtin
> > functions. However, such assembly code can not be folded when used
> > with constant expressions.
>
> Another tact which may help additional sources other than just the
> Linux kernel; it seems that compilers should be able to fold this.
>
> Vincent, if you're interested in making such an optimization in LLVM,
> we'd welcome the contribution, and I'd be happy to show you where to
> make such changes within LLVM; please let me know off thread.

Oh right, it already does.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/ea953b9d9a65c202985a79f1f95da115829baef6/llvm/lib/Transforms/Utils/SimplifyLibCalls.cpp#L2635
I see what's happening. Constant propagation sinks constants into a
specialized version of ffs when there's only 1 callsite in a given
translation unit (or multiple call sites with the same constant).
Then dead argument elimination removes the argument, so libcall
optimization thinks this isn't the ffs(int) you're looking for, and
skips it.  Nice.
https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/issues/57599
I guess ffs() is usually forward declared in strings.h, so we don't
have such a static inline definition available to constant
prop/specialize in normal C code.
-- 
Thanks,
~Nick Desaulniers