Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

NaN canonicalization for singlepass backend. #1303

Merged
merged 23 commits into from
Mar 19, 2020
Merged

NaN canonicalization for singlepass backend. #1303

merged 23 commits into from
Mar 19, 2020

Conversation

losfair
Copy link
Contributor

@losfair losfair commented Mar 15, 2020 •
edited
Loading

  • Implementation
  • Test

@losfair losfair marked this pull request as ready for review March 16, 2020 15:45
nlewycky
nlewycky reviewed Mar 17, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@nlewycky nlewycky left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm worried about the value_stack and fp_stack getting out of sync. At the top of codegen_x64.rs feed_event():

debug_assert!(self.fp_stack.len() == self.value_stack.iter().filter(is_float).len());

?

lib/runtime-core/src/backend.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/singlepass-backend/src/codegen_x64.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/singlepass-backend/src/codegen_x64.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/spectests/spectests/wasmer.wast Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/singlepass-backend/src/codegen_x64.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/singlepass-backend/src/codegen_x64.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/singlepass-backend/src/codegen_x64.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/singlepass-backend/src/codegen_x64.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/singlepass-backend/src/codegen_x64.rs Show resolved Hide resolved
lib/singlepass-backend/src/codegen_x64.rs Outdated
Location::GPR(GPR::RAX),
);
match frame.returns[0] {
WpType::F32 | WpType::F64 => {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this is correct because you can apply canonicalization early, but I think this is unnecessary?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code reference here is outdated so I'm not sure which part you are referring to; but if you mean the Phi-like branch like Br-ing out, early canonicalization is necessary because we don't have the static tracking information after.

@losfair
Copy link
Contributor Author

losfair commented Mar 17, 2020

bors try

bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2020
@bors
Try #1303:
f95e034
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Mar 17, 2020

try

Build failed

@losfair
Copy link
Contributor Author

losfair commented Mar 17, 2020

bors try

bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2020
@bors
Try #1303:
1b812e5
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Mar 17, 2020

try

Build failed

@losfair
Copy link
Contributor Author

losfair commented Mar 18, 2020

bors try

bors bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 18, 2020
@bors
Try #1303:
305df39
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Mar 18, 2020

try

Build succeeded

@syrusakbary syrusakbary mentioned this pull request Mar 18, 2020
Closed
@losfair
Copy link
Contributor Author

losfair commented Mar 19, 2020

bors r+

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors bot commented Mar 19, 2020

Build succeeded

@bors bors bot merged commit 04754aa into master Mar 19, 2020
@bors bors bot deleted the feature/singlepass-nan-cncl branch March 19, 2020 04:34
@ilblackdragon ilblackdragon mentioned this pull request May 11, 2020
Closed
@sorawit sorawit mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2020
Merged
6 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@syrusakbary syrusakbary syrusakbary left review comments

@nlewycky nlewycky nlewycky approved these changes

@Hywan Hywan Awaiting requested review from Hywan

@MarkMcCaskey MarkMcCaskey Awaiting requested review from MarkMcCaskey

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@losfair @syrusakbary @nlewycky