-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.9k
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.
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
Support clobber_abi and vector registers (clobber-only) in PowerPC inline assembly #131341
Conversation
Some changes occurred in compiler/rustc_codegen_gcc |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
76500b8
to
fc3dc84
Compare
|
||
// v0-v19 | ||
// FIXME: PPC32 SysV ABI does not mention vector registers processing. | ||
// https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf | ||
v0, v1, v2, v3, v4, v5, v6, v7, | ||
v8, v9, v10, v11, v12, v13, v14, | ||
v15, v16, v17, v18, v19, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The reason I did not treat these as clobbered only on PPC64 is that the PPC32 ABI document I referenced was released at a time when Altivec/VMX did not exist, and I thought it might not reflect the final status of the PPC32 ABI.
In a similar case, the early ABI documents for s390x (e.g., the one mentioned here) do not mention vector registers, but the ABI documents since the addition of vector facility mention them and all are treated as volatile.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
According to Power Architecture 32-bit Application Binary Interface Supplement 1.0 - Linux & Embedded published in 2011, PPC32 has the same convention here as PPC64.
Therefore, we can just remove the FIXME comment here.
UPDATE: filed #132638
// FIXME: In AIX, v20-v31 are reserved or nonvolatile depending on the mode. | ||
// https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=concepts-aix-vector-programming |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ecnelises @bzEq: Is the default in Rust the default Vector enabled mode, as the name implies? Also, is there a way provided for the compiler to understand the current mode?
(If the first is yes and the second is no, it would be sufficient to simply reject the use of v20-v31 as reserved. If the first is no, this code is fine as is.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It should refer to vec-extabi
, which is the default. See
abi: "vec-extabi".into(), |
Opened #131551 (which is based on this PR) to implement this. (I'm not sticking to whether that PR should be a separate PR or part of this PR, so I can merge that PR into this PR if needed.) |
9fbedcb
to
bad0db8
Compare
In fact, |
7eee8ce
to
369edf1
Compare
Updated to check ABI in v20-v31 for AIX, and update def_regs to reflect the fact that r13 is not reserved on 32-bit AIX (see also LLVM's getReservedRegs). (32-bit AIX is currently not supported by rustc, although) |
f3a4182
to
d30a53e
Compare
| All | `r19` (Hexagon), `x19` (Arm64EC) | This is used internally by LLVM as a "base pointer" for functions with complex stack frames. | | ||
| MIPS | `$0` or `$zero` | This is a constant zero register which can't be modified. | | ||
| MIPS | `$1` or `$at` | Reserved for assembler. | | ||
| MIPS | `$26`/`$k0`, `$27`/`$k1` | OS-reserved registers. | | ||
| MIPS | `$28`/`$gp` | Global pointer cannot be used as inputs or outputs. | | ||
| MIPS | `$ra` | Return address cannot be used as inputs or outputs. | | ||
| Hexagon | `lr` | This is the link register which cannot be used as an input or output. | | ||
| PowerPC | `$r2`, `$r13` | These are system reserved registers. | | ||
| PowerPC | `$r29`, `$r30` | These are used internally by LLVM. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's ok to not support these two registers conservasively IMO, might rephrase to These might be used as base pointer inside LLVM
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I found a line that collectively describes registers in the same situation, so I moved these two there.
| All | `r19` (Hexagon), `r29` (PowerPC), `r30` (PowerPC), `x19` (Arm64EC) | These are used internally by LLVM as "base pointer" for functions with complex stack frames. | |
| All | `r19` (Hexagon), `x19` (Arm64EC) | This is used internally by LLVM as a "base pointer" for functions with complex stack frames. | | ||
| MIPS | `$0` or `$zero` | This is a constant zero register which can't be modified. | | ||
| MIPS | `$1` or `$at` | Reserved for assembler. | | ||
| MIPS | `$26`/`$k0`, `$27`/`$k1` | OS-reserved registers. | | ||
| MIPS | `$28`/`$gp` | Global pointer cannot be used as inputs or outputs. | | ||
| MIPS | `$ra` | Return address cannot be used as inputs or outputs. | | ||
| Hexagon | `lr` | This is the link register which cannot be used as an input or output. | | ||
| PowerPC | `$r2`, `$r13` | These are system reserved registers. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: Separate r2
and r13
.
r2
is used as TOC pointer.
r13
is system reserved register.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Those explanations were just copied from the error message, but AFAIK r2 is used as a thread pointer in the PPC32 SVR4 ABI (Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, OpenBSD), so I think the current explanation is actually fine as is.
rust/compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/powerpc.rs
Lines 197 to 198 in d30a53e
#error = ["r2", "2"] => | |
"r2 is a system reserved register and cannot be used as an operand for inline asm", |
| All | `r19` (Hexagon), `x19` (Arm64EC) | This is used internally by LLVM as a "base pointer" for functions with complex stack frames. | | ||
| MIPS | `$0` or `$zero` | This is a constant zero register which can't be modified. | | ||
| MIPS | `$1` or `$at` | Reserved for assembler. | | ||
| MIPS | `$26`/`$k0`, `$27`/`$k1` | OS-reserved registers. | | ||
| MIPS | `$28`/`$gp` | Global pointer cannot be used as inputs or outputs. | | ||
| MIPS | `$ra` | Return address cannot be used as inputs or outputs. | | ||
| Hexagon | `lr` | This is the link register which cannot be used as an input or output. | | ||
| PowerPC | `$r2`, `$r13` | These are system reserved registers. | | ||
| PowerPC | `$r29`, `$r30` | These are used internally by LLVM. | | ||
| PowerPC | `lr` | The link register cannot be used as an input or output. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think xer
should be not supported either and should occupy a line after lr
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Currently, xer
is supported as a clobber-only register.
| PowerPC | `xer` | `xer` | Only clobbers | |
See https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/216763-project-inline-asm/topic/preserve_flags.20on.20OpenPower.2FPowerPC.3F/near/251292056 for more context.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Cool, I thought these lines are for input or output operands. It makes sense xer
as clobber operand since there are instructions changing the ca
bit of xer
.
0633ee4
to
cb969ca
Compare
I have no more comments and LGTM. |
match &*target.options.abi { | ||
"vec-default" => Err("v20-v31 are reserved on vec-default ABI"), | ||
"vec-extabi" => Ok(()), | ||
_ => unreachable!("unrecognized AIX ABI"), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Noting for myself: I believe this should genuinely not be reachable from user code that isn't using target-spec.json, but I am not 100% confident about this. I should at some point refactor targets so they can emit real errors in these cases, instead. I do not consider this a fact to block this PR over, however, as there is a lot of kinda-questionable handling of some things that might be user-reachable for all the targets, and the worst case here is just an ICE.
@@ -943,6 +944,10 @@ impl InlineAsmClobberAbi { | |||
"C" | "system" => Ok(InlineAsmClobberAbi::LoongArch), | |||
_ => Err(&["C", "system"]), | |||
}, | |||
InlineAsmArch::PowerPC | InlineAsmArch::PowerPC64 => match name { | |||
"C" | "system" => Ok(InlineAsmClobberAbi::PowerPC), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Noting for myself: I find it slightly amusing that "sysv64" is not valid on platforms which... er... use a System V 64-bit ABI... but it "makes sense" because it's for the AMD64 ABI specifically on Windows-like platforms.
| PowerPC | `r2`, `r13` | These are system reserved registers. | | ||
| PowerPC | `lr` | The link register cannot be used as an input or output. | | ||
| PowerPC | `ctr` | The counter register cannot be used as an input or output. | | ||
| PowerPC | `vrsave` | The vrsave register cannot be used as an input or output. | |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a UI test for these? akin to https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/4d88de2acd2cf8595c61e5c8d39183e5579204d8/tests/ui/asm/x86_64/bad-reg.rs
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Added ui test for this: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/131341/files#diff-ad23a8c300c887c5ca754ccb89f97d9a7c5cf714df4ba260adb0055b6678f456
Btw, such unsupported registers are present in most architectures, but only aarch64/arm64ec, x86_64, and not yet merged sparc/sparc64 (and powerpc/powerpc64 by this PR) currently have ui tests for them. I plan to add tests for other arches later.
☔ The latest upstream changes (presumably #132470) made this pull request unmergeable. Please resolve the merge conflicts. |
cb969ca
to
41abeec
Compare
41abeec
to
d19517d
Compare
Add bad-reg inline assembly ui test for RISC-V and s390x rust-lang#131341 (comment) > Btw, such unsupported registers are present in most architectures, but only aarch64/arm64ec, x86_64, and not yet merged [sparc/sparc64](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132472/files#diff-02aebda3376c2b020265137f9ce2c387669ca5cfecd7d60494275c2387db5114) (and powerpc/powerpc64 by this PR) currently have ui tests for them. I plan to add tests for other arches later. Starting with RISC-V and s390x, which I'm familiar with and relatively easy to check for correctness. (Relevant rustc code are supported_types/def_regs/overlapping_regs in [compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/riscv.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/588a4203508ed7c76750c96b482641261630ed36/compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/riscv.rs) and [compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/s390x.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/588a4203508ed7c76750c96b482641261630ed36/compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/s390x.rs).) r? workingjubilee `@rustbot` label +A-inline-assembly
Rollup merge of rust-lang#132516 - taiki-e:asm-ui, r=workingjubilee Add bad-reg inline assembly ui test for RISC-V and s390x rust-lang#131341 (comment) > Btw, such unsupported registers are present in most architectures, but only aarch64/arm64ec, x86_64, and not yet merged [sparc/sparc64](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/132472/files#diff-02aebda3376c2b020265137f9ce2c387669ca5cfecd7d60494275c2387db5114) (and powerpc/powerpc64 by this PR) currently have ui tests for them. I plan to add tests for other arches later. Starting with RISC-V and s390x, which I'm familiar with and relatively easy to check for correctness. (Relevant rustc code are supported_types/def_regs/overlapping_regs in [compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/riscv.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/588a4203508ed7c76750c96b482641261630ed36/compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/riscv.rs) and [compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/s390x.rs](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/588a4203508ed7c76750c96b482641261630ed36/compiler/rustc_target/src/asm/s390x.rs).) r? workingjubilee `@rustbot` label +A-inline-assembly
Thanks! @bors r=bzEq,workingjubilee |
…rkingjubilee Support clobber_abi and vector registers (clobber-only) in PowerPC inline assembly This supports `clobber_abi` which is one of the requirements of stabilization mentioned in rust-lang#93335. This basically does a similar thing I did in rust-lang#130630 to implement `clobber_abi` for s390x, but for powerpc/powerpc64/powerpc64le. - This also supports vector registers (as `vreg`) as clobber-only, which need to support clobbering of them to implement `clobber_abi`. - `vreg` should be able to accept `#[repr(simd)]` types as input/output if the unstable `altivec` target feature is enabled, but `core::arch::{powerpc,powerpc64}` vector types, `#[repr(simd)]`, and `core::simd` are all unstable, so the fact that this is currently a clobber-only should not be considered a blocker of clobber_abi implementation or stabilization. So I have not implemented it in this PR. - See rust-lang#131551 (which is based on this PR) for a PR to implement this. - (I'm not sticking to whether that PR should be a separate PR or part of this PR, so I can merge that PR into this PR if needed.) Refs: - PPC32 SysV: Section "Function Calling Sequence" in [System V Application Binary Interface PowerPC Processor Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf) - PPC64 ELFv1: Section 3.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-bit PowerPC ELF Application Binary Interface Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/ELF/ppc64/PPC-elf64abi.html#FUNC-CALL) - PPC64 ELFv2: Section 2.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-Bit ELF V2 ABI Specification](https://openpowerfoundation.org/specifications/64bitelfabi/) - AIX: [Register usage and conventions](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-register-usage-conventions), [Special registers in the PowerPC®](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-special-registers-in-powerpc), [AIX vector programming](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=concepts-aix-vector-programming) - Register definition in LLVM: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.td#L189 If I understand the above four ABI documentations correctly, except for the PPC32 SysV's VR (Vector Registers) and 32-bit AIX (currently not supported by rustc)'s r13, there does not appear to be important differences in terms of implementing `clobber_abi`: - The above four ABIs are consistent about FPR (0-13: volatile, 14-31: nonvolatile), CR (0-1,5-7: volatile, 2-4: nonvolatile), XER (volatile), and CTR (volatile). - As for GPR, only the registers we are treating as reserved are slightly different - r0, r3-r12 are volatile - r1(sp, reserved), r14-31 are nonvolatile - r2(reserved) is TOC pointer in PPC64 ELF/AIX, system-reserved register in PPC32 SysV (AFAIK used as thread pointer in Linux/BSDs) - r13(reserved for non-32-bit-AIX) is thread pointer in PPC64 ELF, small data area pointer register in PPC32 SysV, "reserved under 64-bit environment; not restored across system calls[^r13]" in AIX) - As for FPSCR, volatile in PPC64 ELFv1/AIX, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv2. - As for VR (Vector Registers), it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, v0-v19 are volatile in both in PPC64 ELF/AIX, v20-v31 are nonvolatile in PPC64 ELF, reserved or nonvolatile depending on the ABI ([vec-extabi vs vec-default in LLVM](https://reviews.llvm.org/D89684), we are [using vec-extabi](rust-lang#131341 (comment))) in AIX: > When the default Vector enabled mode is used, these registers are reserved and must not be used. > In the extended ABI vector enabled mode, these registers are nonvolatile and their values are preserved across function calls I left [FIXME comment about PPC32 SysV](rust-lang#131341 (comment)) and added ABI check for AIX. - As for VRSAVE, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, nonvolatile in PPC64 ELFv1, reserved in PPC64 ELFv2/AIX - As for VSCR, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv1, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC64 ELFv2, volatile in AIX We are currently treating r1-r2, r13 (non-32-bit-AIX), r29-r31, LR, CTR, and VRSAVE as reserved. We are currently not processing anything about FPSCR and VSCR, but I feel those are things that should be processed by `preserves_flags` rather than `clobber_abi` if we need to do something about them. (However, PPCRegisterInfo.td in LLVM does not seem to define anything about them.) Replaces rust-lang#111335 and rust-lang#124279 cc `@ecnelises` `@bzEq` `@lu-zero` r? `@Amanieu` `@rustbot` label +O-PowerPC +A-inline-assembly [^r13]: callee-saved, according to [LLVM](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/6a6af0246bd2d68291582e9aefc0543e5c6102fe/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCCallingConv.td#L322) and [GCC](https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/a9173a50e7e346a218323916e4d3add8552529ae/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h#L859).
Rollup of 9 pull requests Successful merges: - rust-lang#131153 (Improve duplicate derive Copy/Clone diagnostics) - rust-lang#131341 (Support clobber_abi and vector registers (clobber-only) in PowerPC inline assembly) - rust-lang#132025 (fix suggestion for diagnostic error E0027) - rust-lang#132153 (Stabilise `const_char_encode_utf16`.) - rust-lang#132303 (More tests for non-exhaustive C-like enums in FFI) - rust-lang#132473 ([core/fmt] Replace checked slice indexing by unchecked to support panic-free code) - rust-lang#132598 (Clippy: Move some attribute lints to be early pass (post expansion)) - rust-lang#132606 (Improve example of `impl Pattern for &[char]`) - rust-lang#132609 (docs: fix grammar in doc comment at unix/process.rs) r? `@ghost` `@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
☀️ Test successful - checks-actions |
Finished benchmarking commit (96477c5): comparison URL. Overall result: ❌ regressions - no action needed@rustbot label: -perf-regression Instruction countThis is the most reliable metric that we have; it was used to determine the overall result at the top of this comment. However, even this metric can sometimes exhibit noise.
Max RSS (memory usage)Results (primary 2.7%, secondary -0.7%)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.
CyclesThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Binary sizeThis benchmark run did not return any relevant results for this metric. Bootstrap: 780.214s -> 781.474s (0.16%) |
Remove fixme comment about clobber_abi on PowerPC This was considered an unresolved question in rust-lang#131341, but according to the ABI document published in 2011 by Power.org the current implementation is fine as-is. rust-lang#131341 (comment) > According to [Power Architecture 32-bit Application Binary Interface Supplement 1.0 - Linux & Embedded](https://web.archive.org/web/20120608163804/https://www.power.org/resources/downloads/Power-Arch-32-bit-ABI-supp-1.0-Unified.pdf) published in 2011, PPC32 has the same convention here as PPC64. > > Therefore, we can just remove the FIXME comment here. r? workingjubilee
Rollup merge of rust-lang#132638 - taiki-e:ppc-asm-fixme, r=jieyouxu Remove fixme comment about clobber_abi on PowerPC This was considered an unresolved question in rust-lang#131341, but according to the ABI document published in 2011 by Power.org the current implementation is fine as-is. rust-lang#131341 (comment) > According to [Power Architecture 32-bit Application Binary Interface Supplement 1.0 - Linux & Embedded](https://web.archive.org/web/20120608163804/https://www.power.org/resources/downloads/Power-Arch-32-bit-ABI-supp-1.0-Unified.pdf) published in 2011, PPC32 has the same convention here as PPC64. > > Therefore, we can just remove the FIXME comment here. r? workingjubilee
Support clobber_abi and vector registers (clobber-only) in PowerPC inline assembly This supports `clobber_abi` which is one of the requirements of stabilization mentioned in #93335. This basically does a similar thing I did in rust-lang/rust#130630 to implement `clobber_abi` for s390x, but for powerpc/powerpc64/powerpc64le. - This also supports vector registers (as `vreg`) as clobber-only, which need to support clobbering of them to implement `clobber_abi`. - `vreg` should be able to accept `#[repr(simd)]` types as input/output if the unstable `altivec` target feature is enabled, but `core::arch::{powerpc,powerpc64}` vector types, `#[repr(simd)]`, and `core::simd` are all unstable, so the fact that this is currently a clobber-only should not be considered a blocker of clobber_abi implementation or stabilization. So I have not implemented it in this PR. - See rust-lang/rust#131551 (which is based on this PR) for a PR to implement this. - (I'm not sticking to whether that PR should be a separate PR or part of this PR, so I can merge that PR into this PR if needed.) Refs: - PPC32 SysV: Section "Function Calling Sequence" in [System V Application Binary Interface PowerPC Processor Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf) - PPC64 ELFv1: Section 3.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-bit PowerPC ELF Application Binary Interface Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/ELF/ppc64/PPC-elf64abi.html#FUNC-CALL) - PPC64 ELFv2: Section 2.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-Bit ELF V2 ABI Specification](https://openpowerfoundation.org/specifications/64bitelfabi/) - AIX: [Register usage and conventions](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-register-usage-conventions), [Special registers in the PowerPC®](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-special-registers-in-powerpc), [AIX vector programming](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=concepts-aix-vector-programming) - Register definition in LLVM: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.td#L189 If I understand the above four ABI documentations correctly, except for the PPC32 SysV's VR (Vector Registers) and 32-bit AIX (currently not supported by rustc)'s r13, there does not appear to be important differences in terms of implementing `clobber_abi`: - The above four ABIs are consistent about FPR (0-13: volatile, 14-31: nonvolatile), CR (0-1,5-7: volatile, 2-4: nonvolatile), XER (volatile), and CTR (volatile). - As for GPR, only the registers we are treating as reserved are slightly different - r0, r3-r12 are volatile - r1(sp, reserved), r14-31 are nonvolatile - r2(reserved) is TOC pointer in PPC64 ELF/AIX, system-reserved register in PPC32 SysV (AFAIK used as thread pointer in Linux/BSDs) - r13(reserved for non-32-bit-AIX) is thread pointer in PPC64 ELF, small data area pointer register in PPC32 SysV, "reserved under 64-bit environment; not restored across system calls[^r13]" in AIX) - As for FPSCR, volatile in PPC64 ELFv1/AIX, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv2. - As for VR (Vector Registers), it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, v0-v19 are volatile in both in PPC64 ELF/AIX, v20-v31 are nonvolatile in PPC64 ELF, reserved or nonvolatile depending on the ABI ([vec-extabi vs vec-default in LLVM](https://reviews.llvm.org/D89684), we are [using vec-extabi](rust-lang/rust#131341 (comment))) in AIX: > When the default Vector enabled mode is used, these registers are reserved and must not be used. > In the extended ABI vector enabled mode, these registers are nonvolatile and their values are preserved across function calls I left [FIXME comment about PPC32 SysV](rust-lang/rust#131341 (comment)) and added ABI check for AIX. - As for VRSAVE, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, nonvolatile in PPC64 ELFv1, reserved in PPC64 ELFv2/AIX - As for VSCR, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv1, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC64 ELFv2, volatile in AIX We are currently treating r1-r2, r13 (non-32-bit-AIX), r29-r31, LR, CTR, and VRSAVE as reserved. We are currently not processing anything about FPSCR and VSCR, but I feel those are things that should be processed by `preserves_flags` rather than `clobber_abi` if we need to do something about them. (However, PPCRegisterInfo.td in LLVM does not seem to define anything about them.) Replaces #111335 and #124279 cc `@ecnelises` `@bzEq` `@lu-zero` r? `@Amanieu` `@rustbot` label +O-PowerPC +A-inline-assembly [^r13]: callee-saved, according to [LLVM](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/6a6af0246bd2d68291582e9aefc0543e5c6102fe/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCCallingConv.td#L322) and [GCC](https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/a9173a50e7e346a218323916e4d3add8552529ae/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h#L859).
Support clobber_abi and vector registers (clobber-only) in PowerPC inline assembly This supports `clobber_abi` which is one of the requirements of stabilization mentioned in #93335. This basically does a similar thing I did in rust-lang/rust#130630 to implement `clobber_abi` for s390x, but for powerpc/powerpc64/powerpc64le. - This also supports vector registers (as `vreg`) as clobber-only, which need to support clobbering of them to implement `clobber_abi`. - `vreg` should be able to accept `#[repr(simd)]` types as input/output if the unstable `altivec` target feature is enabled, but `core::arch::{powerpc,powerpc64}` vector types, `#[repr(simd)]`, and `core::simd` are all unstable, so the fact that this is currently a clobber-only should not be considered a blocker of clobber_abi implementation or stabilization. So I have not implemented it in this PR. - See rust-lang/rust#131551 (which is based on this PR) for a PR to implement this. - (I'm not sticking to whether that PR should be a separate PR or part of this PR, so I can merge that PR into this PR if needed.) Refs: - PPC32 SysV: Section "Function Calling Sequence" in [System V Application Binary Interface PowerPC Processor Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf) - PPC64 ELFv1: Section 3.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-bit PowerPC ELF Application Binary Interface Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/ELF/ppc64/PPC-elf64abi.html#FUNC-CALL) - PPC64 ELFv2: Section 2.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-Bit ELF V2 ABI Specification](https://openpowerfoundation.org/specifications/64bitelfabi/) - AIX: [Register usage and conventions](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-register-usage-conventions), [Special registers in the PowerPC®](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-special-registers-in-powerpc), [AIX vector programming](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=concepts-aix-vector-programming) - Register definition in LLVM: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.td#L189 If I understand the above four ABI documentations correctly, except for the PPC32 SysV's VR (Vector Registers) and 32-bit AIX (currently not supported by rustc)'s r13, there does not appear to be important differences in terms of implementing `clobber_abi`: - The above four ABIs are consistent about FPR (0-13: volatile, 14-31: nonvolatile), CR (0-1,5-7: volatile, 2-4: nonvolatile), XER (volatile), and CTR (volatile). - As for GPR, only the registers we are treating as reserved are slightly different - r0, r3-r12 are volatile - r1(sp, reserved), r14-31 are nonvolatile - r2(reserved) is TOC pointer in PPC64 ELF/AIX, system-reserved register in PPC32 SysV (AFAIK used as thread pointer in Linux/BSDs) - r13(reserved for non-32-bit-AIX) is thread pointer in PPC64 ELF, small data area pointer register in PPC32 SysV, "reserved under 64-bit environment; not restored across system calls[^r13]" in AIX) - As for FPSCR, volatile in PPC64 ELFv1/AIX, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv2. - As for VR (Vector Registers), it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, v0-v19 are volatile in both in PPC64 ELF/AIX, v20-v31 are nonvolatile in PPC64 ELF, reserved or nonvolatile depending on the ABI ([vec-extabi vs vec-default in LLVM](https://reviews.llvm.org/D89684), we are [using vec-extabi](rust-lang/rust#131341 (comment))) in AIX: > When the default Vector enabled mode is used, these registers are reserved and must not be used. > In the extended ABI vector enabled mode, these registers are nonvolatile and their values are preserved across function calls I left [FIXME comment about PPC32 SysV](rust-lang/rust#131341 (comment)) and added ABI check for AIX. - As for VRSAVE, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, nonvolatile in PPC64 ELFv1, reserved in PPC64 ELFv2/AIX - As for VSCR, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv1, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC64 ELFv2, volatile in AIX We are currently treating r1-r2, r13 (non-32-bit-AIX), r29-r31, LR, CTR, and VRSAVE as reserved. We are currently not processing anything about FPSCR and VSCR, but I feel those are things that should be processed by `preserves_flags` rather than `clobber_abi` if we need to do something about them. (However, PPCRegisterInfo.td in LLVM does not seem to define anything about them.) Replaces #111335 and #124279 cc `@ecnelises` `@bzEq` `@lu-zero` r? `@Amanieu` `@rustbot` label +O-PowerPC +A-inline-assembly [^r13]: callee-saved, according to [LLVM](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/6a6af0246bd2d68291582e9aefc0543e5c6102fe/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCCallingConv.td#L322) and [GCC](https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/a9173a50e7e346a218323916e4d3add8552529ae/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h#L859).
Support clobber_abi and vector registers (clobber-only) in PowerPC inline assembly This supports `clobber_abi` which is one of the requirements of stabilization mentioned in #93335. This basically does a similar thing I did in rust-lang/rust#130630 to implement `clobber_abi` for s390x, but for powerpc/powerpc64/powerpc64le. - This also supports vector registers (as `vreg`) as clobber-only, which need to support clobbering of them to implement `clobber_abi`. - `vreg` should be able to accept `#[repr(simd)]` types as input/output if the unstable `altivec` target feature is enabled, but `core::arch::{powerpc,powerpc64}` vector types, `#[repr(simd)]`, and `core::simd` are all unstable, so the fact that this is currently a clobber-only should not be considered a blocker of clobber_abi implementation or stabilization. So I have not implemented it in this PR. - See rust-lang/rust#131551 (which is based on this PR) for a PR to implement this. - (I'm not sticking to whether that PR should be a separate PR or part of this PR, so I can merge that PR into this PR if needed.) Refs: - PPC32 SysV: Section "Function Calling Sequence" in [System V Application Binary Interface PowerPC Processor Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/elf/elfspec_ppc.pdf) - PPC64 ELFv1: Section 3.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-bit PowerPC ELF Application Binary Interface Supplement](https://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/ELF/ppc64/PPC-elf64abi.html#FUNC-CALL) - PPC64 ELFv2: Section 2.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in [64-Bit ELF V2 ABI Specification](https://openpowerfoundation.org/specifications/64bitelfabi/) - AIX: [Register usage and conventions](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-register-usage-conventions), [Special registers in the PowerPC®](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=overview-special-registers-in-powerpc), [AIX vector programming](https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/aix/7.3?topic=concepts-aix-vector-programming) - Register definition in LLVM: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/llvmorg-19.1.0/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCRegisterInfo.td#L189 If I understand the above four ABI documentations correctly, except for the PPC32 SysV's VR (Vector Registers) and 32-bit AIX (currently not supported by rustc)'s r13, there does not appear to be important differences in terms of implementing `clobber_abi`: - The above four ABIs are consistent about FPR (0-13: volatile, 14-31: nonvolatile), CR (0-1,5-7: volatile, 2-4: nonvolatile), XER (volatile), and CTR (volatile). - As for GPR, only the registers we are treating as reserved are slightly different - r0, r3-r12 are volatile - r1(sp, reserved), r14-31 are nonvolatile - r2(reserved) is TOC pointer in PPC64 ELF/AIX, system-reserved register in PPC32 SysV (AFAIK used as thread pointer in Linux/BSDs) - r13(reserved for non-32-bit-AIX) is thread pointer in PPC64 ELF, small data area pointer register in PPC32 SysV, "reserved under 64-bit environment; not restored across system calls[^r13]" in AIX) - As for FPSCR, volatile in PPC64 ELFv1/AIX, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv2. - As for VR (Vector Registers), it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, v0-v19 are volatile in both in PPC64 ELF/AIX, v20-v31 are nonvolatile in PPC64 ELF, reserved or nonvolatile depending on the ABI ([vec-extabi vs vec-default in LLVM](https://reviews.llvm.org/D89684), we are [using vec-extabi](rust-lang/rust#131341 (comment))) in AIX: > When the default Vector enabled mode is used, these registers are reserved and must not be used. > In the extended ABI vector enabled mode, these registers are nonvolatile and their values are preserved across function calls I left [FIXME comment about PPC32 SysV](rust-lang/rust#131341 (comment)) and added ABI check for AIX. - As for VRSAVE, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, nonvolatile in PPC64 ELFv1, reserved in PPC64 ELFv2/AIX - As for VSCR, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv1, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC64 ELFv2, volatile in AIX We are currently treating r1-r2, r13 (non-32-bit-AIX), r29-r31, LR, CTR, and VRSAVE as reserved. We are currently not processing anything about FPSCR and VSCR, but I feel those are things that should be processed by `preserves_flags` rather than `clobber_abi` if we need to do something about them. (However, PPCRegisterInfo.td in LLVM does not seem to define anything about them.) Replaces #111335 and #124279 cc `@ecnelises` `@bzEq` `@lu-zero` r? `@Amanieu` `@rustbot` label +O-PowerPC +A-inline-assembly [^r13]: callee-saved, according to [LLVM](https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/blob/6a6af0246bd2d68291582e9aefc0543e5c6102fe/llvm/lib/Target/PowerPC/PPCCallingConv.td#L322) and [GCC](https://github.com/gcc-mirror/gcc/blob/a9173a50e7e346a218323916e4d3add8552529ae/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000.h#L859).
This supports
clobber_abi
which is one of the requirements of stabilization mentioned in #93335.This basically does a similar thing I did in #130630 to implement
clobber_abi
for s390x, but for powerpc/powerpc64/powerpc64le.vreg
) as clobber-only, which need to support clobbering of them to implementclobber_abi
.vreg
should be able to accept#[repr(simd)]
types as input/output if the unstablealtivec
target feature is enabled, butcore::arch::{powerpc,powerpc64}
vector types,#[repr(simd)]
, andcore::simd
are all unstable, so the fact that this is currently a clobber-only should not be considered a blocker of clobber_abi implementation or stabilization. So I have not implemented it in this PR.Refs:
EDIT: this document is old; See section 3.2 "Function Calling Sequence" in Power Architecture 32-bit Application Binary Interface Supplement 1.0 - Linux & Embedded instead. (Remove fixme comment about clobber_abi on PowerPC #132638)
If I understand the above four ABI documentations correctly, except for the PPC32 SysV's VR (Vector Registers) and 32-bit AIX (currently not supported by rustc)'s r13, there does not appear to be important differences in terms of implementing
clobber_abi
:The above four ABIs are consistent about FPR (0-13: volatile, 14-31: nonvolatile), CR (0-1,5-7: volatile, 2-4: nonvolatile), XER (volatile), and CTR (volatile).
As for GPR, only the registers we are treating as reserved are slightly different
As for FPSCR, volatile in PPC64 ELFv1/AIX, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv2.
As for VR (Vector Registers), it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, v0-v19 are volatile in both in PPC64 ELF/AIX, v20-v31 are nonvolatile in PPC64 ELF, reserved or nonvolatile depending on the ABI (vec-extabi vs vec-default in LLVM, we are using vec-extabi) in AIX:
I left FIXME comment about PPC32 SysV and added ABI check for AIX.
As for VRSAVE, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV, nonvolatile in PPC64 ELFv1, reserved in PPC64 ELFv2/AIX
As for VSCR, it is not mentioned in PPC32 SysV/PPC64 ELFv1, some fields are volatile only in certain situations (rest are volatile) in PPC64 ELFv2, volatile in AIX
We are currently treating r1-r2, r13 (non-32-bit-AIX), r29-r31, LR, CTR, and VRSAVE as reserved.
We are currently not processing anything about FPSCR and VSCR, but I feel those are things that should be processed by
preserves_flags
rather thanclobber_abi
if we need to do something about them. (However, PPCRegisterInfo.td in LLVM does not seem to define anything about them.)Replaces #111335 and #124279
cc @ecnelises @bzEq @lu-zero
r? @Amanieu
@rustbot label +O-PowerPC +A-inline-assembly
Footnotes
callee-saved, according to LLVM and GCC. ↩