[llvm-dev] Conditional references between globals in LLVM IR

[Fangrui Song via llvm-dev]

On 2021-08-17, Kuba Mracek wrote:
>
>
>> On Aug 17, 2021, at 11:32 AM, Fangrui Song <maskray at google.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2021-08-17, Kuba Mracek via llvm-dev wrote:
>>> I don't see how comdats solve this problem, unless you're suggesting to extend them somehow beyond how they work today? Or could you try to show how my example would look like with comdats?
>>>
>>> Maybe I'm missing something, but if I put @a, @b and @assoc in a single comdat then the behavior I get is that if anything references @a or @b, then the whole group is retained. That's not what I'm looking for -- I need to somehow be able to drop @assoc if only @a or only @b is referenced, but keep it if both are referenced.
>>>
>>> Also note that in my example, nothing is referencing @assoc -- the only thing keeping it alive is @llvm.used. So if I put @assoc in a separate comdat, it's going to be trivially dropped.
>>>
>>> Kuba
>>>
>>>> On Aug 17, 2021, at 9:51 AM, Reid Kleckner <rnk at google.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Can this be expressed with comdat groups? I believe GlobalDCE should already handle those in the way that you want: if any member is referenced, the whole group is retained, if no members are referenced, the whole group is dropped.
>>>>
>>>> There is a slight wrinkle that MachO doesn't support comdats, but that is the IR feature that we use to express this idea.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 5:27 PM Kuba Mracek via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>> wrote:
>>>> Hi llvm-dev!
>>>>
>>>> I'm trying to add dead-stripability of types into the Swift compiler, and for that I need some new affordance in the LLVM IR to be able to express the condition that says "this global can be removed if either of these other globals are removable" -- for a concrete example see below. As pcc has pointed out to me, we already have a !associated metadata, and what I'm looking for is basically a generalization of this concept.
>>>>
>>>>  @a = internal global i32 1
>>>>  @b = internal global i32 2
>>>>  @assoc = internal global [2 x i32*] { i32* @a, i32* @b } !1
>>>>
>>>>  ... other code here possibly using or not using @a and @b ...
>>>>
>>>>  ; Somehow I want to express that the references from @assoc to @a and @b are not to be taken into account
>>>>  ; when doing global liveness analysis, and presence of @assoc in @llvm.used and @llvm.compiler.used should
>>>>  ; be ignored as well. Instead the references from @assoc to @a and @b are conceptually supposed to be "weak"
>>>>  ; references that will not keep targets alive if there are no "strong" (regular) references. And if either @a or @b
>>>>  ; (or both) do get removed, then @assoc should also be removed.
>>>>  !1 = !{ ... }
>>>>
>>>>  ; We need to mention @assoc in @llvm.used or @llvm.compiler.used, otherwise @assoc is trivially removable.
>>>>  @llvm.used = appending global [...] { @assoc }
>>
>> There is an unusual condition: "if either @a or @b (or both) do get removed, then @assoc should also be removed."
>>
>> If @assoc is to be retained if either @a or @b is live at link time, this dead
>> stripping relation can be expressed via Mach-O S_ATTR_LIVE_SUPPORT.
>
>That I'm afraid is not accurate -- I believe the Mach-O support for S_ATTR_LIVE_SUPPORT at least in ld64 is limited to a single reference per global.

ld64.lld supports more references.

 From https://github.com/apple-opensource/ld64 Resolver::deadStripOptimize, I think multiple references are supported.
But I don't have a macOS device to confirm.

>>
>> (
>> The existing !associated can not express many-to-one relationship.
>> (https://reviews.llvm.org/D97430 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D97430> is such a (complex) case.)
>>
>> For ELF, we can use R_*_NONE relocations to express such many-to-one relationship.
>> There is no LLVM IR feature expressing this yet.
>> )
>>
>> I don't think any linker feature in PE/COFF, ELF, or Mach-O can express the
>> desiged garbage collection (dead stripping) semantics for the generic case.
>
>And I'm fine with that. I don't need this information to survive into object files, I'm okay to rely on GlobalDCE (on a translation-unit level, or on an LTO unit with LTO enabled) to do the work only on IR.
>
>>
>>>> This example above basically shows the situation of Swift's Protocol Conformance Records, which don't have any incoming static references and instead they are scanned and processed by the runtime (by looking those records up via APIs from the dynamic linker), so they need the @llvm.used marker to survive into the final binary. They reference two other globals, a type record and a protocol record, which means that today they actually keep both the type and the protocol alive transitively, and therefore prohibit dead-stripping of those. So practically, the @llvm.used marker is necessary but also too conservative at the same time, and I want to relax removal rules on these globals -- specifically these Protocol Conformance Records and some other records in similar situations.
>>
>> Can you give more information why Swift needs this unusual garbage collection
>> behavior?
>
>To allow effective dead stripping: When a particular type/protocol defined in user's code is not actually used, I want that type/protocol and all the code that comes with it to be removed / removable by the optimizer. Today, these Protocol Conformance Records act as liveness roots that prohibit removal of classes/structs/protocols because they actually reference them.
>
>> When @a is retained while @b is dropped, what is the @assoc content supposed to
>> be (a) when the compiler generates the object file and (b) when the linker
>> performs section based garbage collection (dead stripping)?
>
>If @b is dropped, @assoc should be dropped as well.

This is the unusual condition to me.
Regular section based garbage collection/dead stripping uses the logical
OR condition. One section is retained if any section referencing it is
retained.

Now your request is a logical AND: 
one section is retained if all section referencing it are retained.
I still don't why it is designed this way from your description of 
classes/structs/protocols. Don't you still need to retain the
Conformance Record if any of classes/structs/protocols is retained?

>What should the linker do (or what should its inputs be) is somewhat orthogonal -- I assume none of the existing object file format can express the semantics, so we could just be conservative and lower the globals into something that not going to be efficient but won't eliminate any globals that it shouldn't.

OK. I understand this part of your proposal now.

>>>> What I'm looking for is 1) a design for how to represent this in LLVM IR, 2) and an implementation in GlobalDCE that would actually follow these rules and remove globals whenever allowed. For the latter, me and Manman have prepared a patch, see <https://reviews.llvm.org/D104496 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D104496><https://reviews.llvm.org/D104496 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D104496>>>, which does the job by adding a new specially named metadata -- !llvm.used.conditional -- that has a specific structure that can express these "conditionally used globals". But mainly I'd like to figure out the former -- what should this look like in the IR. Should we try to extend the existing !associated metadata? If yes, can we teach GlobalDCE to optimize based on !associated markers? Should we have a list like !llvm.used.conditional instead? Should it subsume !associated metadata and replace it?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks ahead for any feedback!
>>>>
>>>> Kuba
>