Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1 | ===================================== |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 2 | Garbage Collection with LLVM |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 3 | ===================================== |
| 4 | |
| 5 | .. contents:: |
| 6 | :local: |
| 7 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 8 | Abstract |
| 9 | ======== |
| 10 | |
| 11 | This document covers how to integrate LLVM into a compiler for a language which |
| 12 | supports garbage collection. **Note that LLVM itself does not provide a |
| 13 | garbage collector.** You must provide your own. |
| 14 | |
| 15 | Quick Start |
| 16 | ============ |
| 17 | |
| 18 | First, you should pick a collector strategy. LLVM includes a number of built |
| 19 | in ones, but you can also implement a loadable plugin with a custom definition. |
| 20 | Note that the collector strategy is a description of how LLVM should generate |
| 21 | code such that it interacts with your collector and runtime, not a description |
| 22 | of the collector itself. |
| 23 | |
| 24 | Next, mark your generated functions as using your chosen collector strategy. |
| 25 | From c++, you can call: |
| 26 | |
| 27 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 28 | |
| 29 | F.setGC(<collector description name>); |
| 30 | |
| 31 | |
| 32 | This will produce IR like the following fragment: |
| 33 | |
| 34 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 35 | |
| 36 | define void @foo() gc "<collector description name>" { ... } |
| 37 | |
| 38 | |
| 39 | When generating LLVM IR for your functions, you will need to: |
| 40 | |
| 41 | * Use ``@llvm.gcread`` and/or ``@llvm.gcwrite`` in place of standard load and |
| 42 | store instructions. These intrinsics are used to represent load and store |
| 43 | barriers. If you collector does not require such barriers, you can skip |
| 44 | this step. |
| 45 | |
| 46 | * Use the memory allocation routines provided by your garbage collector's |
| 47 | runtime library. |
| 48 | |
| 49 | * If your collector requires them, generate type maps according to your |
| 50 | runtime's binary interface. LLVM is not involved in the process. In |
| 51 | particular, the LLVM type system is not suitable for conveying such |
| 52 | information though the compiler. |
| 53 | |
| 54 | * Insert any coordination code required for interacting with your collector. |
| 55 | Many collectors require running application code to periodically check a |
| 56 | flag and conditionally call a runtime function. This is often referred to |
| 57 | as a safepoint poll. |
| 58 | |
| 59 | You will need to identify roots (i.e. references to heap objects your collector |
| 60 | needs to know about) in your generated IR, so that LLVM can encode them into |
| 61 | your final stack maps. Depending on the collector strategy chosen, this is |
| 62 | accomplished by using either the ``@llvm.gcroot`` intrinsics or an |
| 63 | ``gc.statepoint`` relocation sequence. |
| 64 | |
| 65 | Don't forget to create a root for each intermediate value that is generated when |
| 66 | evaluating an expression. In ``h(f(), g())``, the result of ``f()`` could |
| 67 | easily be collected if evaluating ``g()`` triggers a collection. |
| 68 | |
| 69 | Finally, you need to link your runtime library with the generated program |
| 70 | executable (for a static compiler) or ensure the appropriate symbols are |
| 71 | available for the runtime linker (for a JIT compiler). |
| 72 | |
| 73 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 74 | Introduction |
| 75 | ============ |
| 76 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 77 | What is Garbage Collection? |
| 78 | --------------------------- |
| 79 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 80 | Garbage collection is a widely used technique that frees the programmer from |
| 81 | having to know the lifetimes of heap objects, making software easier to produce |
| 82 | and maintain. Many programming languages rely on garbage collection for |
| 83 | automatic memory management. There are two primary forms of garbage collection: |
| 84 | conservative and accurate. |
| 85 | |
| 86 | Conservative garbage collection often does not require any special support from |
| 87 | either the language or the compiler: it can handle non-type-safe programming |
| 88 | languages (such as C/C++) and does not require any special information from the |
| 89 | compiler. The `Boehm collector |
| 90 | <http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/>`__ is an example of a |
| 91 | state-of-the-art conservative collector. |
| 92 | |
| 93 | Accurate garbage collection requires the ability to identify all pointers in the |
| 94 | program at run-time (which requires that the source-language be type-safe in |
| 95 | most cases). Identifying pointers at run-time requires compiler support to |
| 96 | locate all places that hold live pointer variables at run-time, including the |
| 97 | :ref:`processor stack and registers <gcroot>`. |
| 98 | |
| 99 | Conservative garbage collection is attractive because it does not require any |
| 100 | special compiler support, but it does have problems. In particular, because the |
| 101 | conservative garbage collector cannot *know* that a particular word in the |
| 102 | machine is a pointer, it cannot move live objects in the heap (preventing the |
| 103 | use of compacting and generational GC algorithms) and it can occasionally suffer |
| 104 | from memory leaks due to integer values that happen to point to objects in the |
| 105 | program. In addition, some aggressive compiler transformations can break |
| 106 | conservative garbage collectors (though these seem rare in practice). |
| 107 | |
| 108 | Accurate garbage collectors do not suffer from any of these problems, but they |
| 109 | can suffer from degraded scalar optimization of the program. In particular, |
| 110 | because the runtime must be able to identify and update all pointers active in |
| 111 | the program, some optimizations are less effective. In practice, however, the |
| 112 | locality and performance benefits of using aggressive garbage collection |
| 113 | techniques dominates any low-level losses. |
| 114 | |
| 115 | This document describes the mechanisms and interfaces provided by LLVM to |
| 116 | support accurate garbage collection. |
| 117 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 118 | Goals and non-goals |
| 119 | ------------------- |
| 120 | |
| 121 | LLVM's intermediate representation provides :ref:`garbage collection intrinsics |
| 122 | <gc_intrinsics>` that offer support for a broad class of collector models. For |
| 123 | instance, the intrinsics permit: |
| 124 | |
| 125 | * semi-space collectors |
| 126 | |
| 127 | * mark-sweep collectors |
| 128 | |
| 129 | * generational collectors |
| 130 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 131 | * incremental collectors |
| 132 | |
| 133 | * concurrent collectors |
| 134 | |
| 135 | * cooperative collectors |
| 136 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 137 | * reference counting |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 138 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 139 | We hope that the support built into the LLVM IR is sufficient to support a |
| 140 | broad class of garbage collected languages including Scheme, ML, Java, C#, |
| 141 | Perl, Python, Lua, Ruby, other scripting languages, and more. |
| 142 | |
| 143 | Note that LLVM **does not itself provide a garbage collector** --- this should |
| 144 | be part of your language's runtime library. LLVM provides a framework for |
| 145 | describing the garbage collectors requirements to the compiler. In particular, |
| 146 | LLVM provides support for generating stack maps at call sites, polling for a |
| 147 | safepoint, and emitting load and store barriers. You can also extend LLVM - |
| 148 | possibly through a loadable :ref:`code generation plugins <plugin>` - to |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 149 | generate code and data structures which conforms to the *binary interface* |
| 150 | specified by the *runtime library*. This is similar to the relationship between |
| 151 | LLVM and DWARF debugging info, for example. The difference primarily lies in |
| 152 | the lack of an established standard in the domain of garbage collection --- thus |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 153 | the need for a flexible extension mechanism. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 154 | |
| 155 | The aspects of the binary interface with which LLVM's GC support is |
| 156 | concerned are: |
| 157 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 158 | * Creation of GC safepoints within code where collection is allowed to execute |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 159 | safely. |
| 160 | |
| 161 | * Computation of the stack map. For each safe point in the code, object |
| 162 | references within the stack frame must be identified so that the collector may |
| 163 | traverse and perhaps update them. |
| 164 | |
| 165 | * Write barriers when storing object references to the heap. These are commonly |
| 166 | used to optimize incremental scans in generational collectors. |
| 167 | |
| 168 | * Emission of read barriers when loading object references. These are useful |
| 169 | for interoperating with concurrent collectors. |
| 170 | |
| 171 | There are additional areas that LLVM does not directly address: |
| 172 | |
| 173 | * Registration of global roots with the runtime. |
| 174 | |
| 175 | * Registration of stack map entries with the runtime. |
| 176 | |
| 177 | * The functions used by the program to allocate memory, trigger a collection, |
| 178 | etc. |
| 179 | |
| 180 | * Computation or compilation of type maps, or registration of them with the |
| 181 | runtime. These are used to crawl the heap for object references. |
| 182 | |
| 183 | In general, LLVM's support for GC does not include features which can be |
| 184 | adequately addressed with other features of the IR and does not specify a |
| 185 | particular binary interface. On the plus side, this means that you should be |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 186 | able to integrate LLVM with an existing runtime. On the other hand, it can |
| 187 | have the effect of leaving a lot of work for the developer of a novel |
| 188 | language. We try to mitigate this by providing built in collector strategy |
| 189 | descriptions that can work with many common collector designs and easy |
| 190 | extension points. If you don't already have a specific binary interface |
| 191 | you need to support, we recommend trying to use one of these built in collector |
| 192 | strategies. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 193 | |
| 194 | .. _gc_intrinsics: |
| 195 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 196 | LLVM IR Features |
| 197 | ================ |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 198 | |
| 199 | This section describes the garbage collection facilities provided by the |
| 200 | :doc:`LLVM intermediate representation <LangRef>`. The exact behavior of these |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 201 | IR features is specified by the selected :ref:`GC strategy description |
| 202 | <plugin>`. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 203 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 204 | Specifying GC code generation: ``gc "..."`` |
| 205 | ------------------------------------------- |
| 206 | |
| 207 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 208 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 209 | define <returntype> @name(...) gc "name" { ... } |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 210 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 211 | The ``gc`` function attribute is used to specify the desired GC strategy to the |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 212 | compiler. Its programmatic equivalent is the ``setGC`` method of ``Function``. |
| 213 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 214 | Setting ``gc "name"`` on a function triggers a search for a matching subclass |
| 215 | of GCStrategy. Some collector strategies are built in. You can add others |
| 216 | using either the loadable plugin mechanism, or by patching your copy of LLVM. |
| 217 | It is the selected GC strategy which defines the exact nature of the code |
| 218 | generated to support GC. If none is found, the compiler will raise an error. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 219 | |
| 220 | Specifying the GC style on a per-function basis allows LLVM to link together |
| 221 | programs that use different garbage collection algorithms (or none at all). |
| 222 | |
| 223 | .. _gcroot: |
| 224 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 225 | Identifying GC roots on the stack |
| 226 | ---------------------------------- |
| 227 | |
| 228 | LLVM currently supports two different mechanisms for describing references in |
| 229 | compiled code at safepoints. ``llvm.gcroot`` is the older mechanism; |
| 230 | ``gc.statepoint`` has been added more recently. At the moment, you can choose |
| 231 | either implementation (on a per :ref:`GC strategy <plugin>` basis). Longer |
| 232 | term, we will probably either migrate away from ``llvm.gcroot`` entirely, or |
| 233 | substantially merge their implementations. Note that most new development |
| 234 | work is focused on ``gc.statepoint``. |
| 235 | |
| 236 | Using ``gc.statepoint`` |
| 237 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 238 | :doc:`This page <Statepoints>` contains detailed documentation for |
| 239 | ``gc.statepoint``. |
| 240 | |
| 241 | Using ``llvm.gcwrite`` |
| 242 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 243 | |
| 244 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 245 | |
| 246 | void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %ptrloc, i8* %metadata) |
| 247 | |
| 248 | The ``llvm.gcroot`` intrinsic is used to inform LLVM that a stack variable |
| 249 | references an object on the heap and is to be tracked for garbage collection. |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 250 | The exact impact on generated code is specified by the Function's selected |
| 251 | :ref:`GC strategy <plugin>`. All calls to ``llvm.gcroot`` **must** reside |
| 252 | inside the first basic block. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 253 | |
| 254 | The first argument **must** be a value referring to an alloca instruction or a |
| 255 | bitcast of an alloca. The second contains a pointer to metadata that should be |
| 256 | associated with the pointer, and **must** be a constant or global value |
| 257 | address. If your target collector uses tags, use a null pointer for metadata. |
| 258 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 259 | A compiler which performs manual SSA construction **must** ensure that SSA |
| 260 | values representing GC references are stored in to the alloca passed to the |
| 261 | respective ``gcroot`` before every call site and reloaded after every call. |
| 262 | A compiler which uses mem2reg to raise imperative code using ``alloca`` into |
| 263 | SSA form need only add a call to ``@llvm.gcroot`` for those variables which |
| 264 | are pointers into the GC heap. |
| 265 | |
| 266 | It is also important to mark intermediate values with ``llvm.gcroot``. For |
| 267 | example, consider ``h(f(), g())``. Beware leaking the result of ``f()`` in the |
| 268 | case that ``g()`` triggers a collection. Note, that stack variables must be |
| 269 | initialized and marked with ``llvm.gcroot`` in function's prologue. |
| 270 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 271 | The ``%metadata`` argument can be used to avoid requiring heap objects to have |
| 272 | 'isa' pointers or tag bits. [Appel89_, Goldberg91_, Tolmach94_] If specified, |
| 273 | its value will be tracked along with the location of the pointer in the stack |
| 274 | frame. |
| 275 | |
| 276 | Consider the following fragment of Java code: |
| 277 | |
| 278 | .. code-block:: java |
| 279 | |
| 280 | { |
| 281 | Object X; // A null-initialized reference to an object |
| 282 | ... |
| 283 | } |
| 284 | |
| 285 | This block (which may be located in the middle of a function or in a loop nest), |
| 286 | could be compiled to this LLVM code: |
| 287 | |
| 288 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 289 | |
| 290 | Entry: |
| 291 | ;; In the entry block for the function, allocate the |
| 292 | ;; stack space for X, which is an LLVM pointer. |
| 293 | %X = alloca %Object* |
| 294 | |
| 295 | ;; Tell LLVM that the stack space is a stack root. |
| 296 | ;; Java has type-tags on objects, so we pass null as metadata. |
| 297 | %tmp = bitcast %Object** %X to i8** |
| 298 | call void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %tmp, i8* null) |
| 299 | ... |
| 300 | |
| 301 | ;; "CodeBlock" is the block corresponding to the start |
| 302 | ;; of the scope above. |
| 303 | CodeBlock: |
| 304 | ;; Java null-initializes pointers. |
| 305 | store %Object* null, %Object** %X |
| 306 | |
| 307 | ... |
| 308 | |
| 309 | ;; As the pointer goes out of scope, store a null value into |
| 310 | ;; it, to indicate that the value is no longer live. |
| 311 | store %Object* null, %Object** %X |
| 312 | ... |
| 313 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 314 | Reading and writing references in the heap |
| 315 | ------------------------------------------ |
| 316 | |
| 317 | Some collectors need to be informed when the mutator (the program that needs |
| 318 | garbage collection) either reads a pointer from or writes a pointer to a field |
| 319 | of a heap object. The code fragments inserted at these points are called *read |
| 320 | barriers* and *write barriers*, respectively. The amount of code that needs to |
| 321 | be executed is usually quite small and not on the critical path of any |
| 322 | computation, so the overall performance impact of the barrier is tolerable. |
| 323 | |
| 324 | Barriers often require access to the *object pointer* rather than the *derived |
| 325 | pointer* (which is a pointer to the field within the object). Accordingly, |
| 326 | these intrinsics take both pointers as separate arguments for completeness. In |
| 327 | this snippet, ``%object`` is the object pointer, and ``%derived`` is the derived |
| 328 | pointer: |
| 329 | |
| 330 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 331 | |
| 332 | ;; An array type. |
| 333 | %class.Array = type { %class.Object, i32, [0 x %class.Object*] } |
| 334 | ... |
| 335 | |
| 336 | ;; Load the object pointer from a gcroot. |
| 337 | %object = load %class.Array** %object_addr |
| 338 | |
| 339 | ;; Compute the derived pointer. |
| 340 | %derived = getelementptr %object, i32 0, i32 2, i32 %n |
| 341 | |
| 342 | LLVM does not enforce this relationship between the object and derived pointer |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 343 | (although a particular :ref:`collector strategy <plugin>` might). However, it |
| 344 | would be an unusual collector that violated it. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 345 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 346 | The use of these intrinsics is naturally optional if the target GC does not |
| 347 | require the corresponding barrier. The GC strategy used with such a collector |
| 348 | should replace the intrinsic calls with the corresponding ``load`` or |
| 349 | ``store`` instruction if they are used. |
| 350 | |
| 351 | One known deficiency with the current design is that the barrier intrinsics do |
| 352 | not include the size or alignment of the underlying operation performed. It is |
| 353 | currently assumed that the operation is of pointer size and the alignment is |
| 354 | assumed to be the target machine's default alignment. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 355 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 356 | Write barrier: ``llvm.gcwrite`` |
| 357 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 358 | |
| 359 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 360 | |
| 361 | void @llvm.gcwrite(i8* %value, i8* %object, i8** %derived) |
| 362 | |
| 363 | For write barriers, LLVM provides the ``llvm.gcwrite`` intrinsic function. It |
| 364 | has exactly the same semantics as a non-volatile ``store`` to the derived |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 365 | pointer (the third argument). The exact code generated is specified by the |
| 366 | Function's selected :ref:`GC strategy <plugin>`. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 367 | |
| 368 | Many important algorithms require write barriers, including generational and |
| 369 | concurrent collectors. Additionally, write barriers could be used to implement |
| 370 | reference counting. |
| 371 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 372 | Read barrier: ``llvm.gcread`` |
| 373 | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ |
| 374 | |
| 375 | .. code-block:: llvm |
| 376 | |
| 377 | i8* @llvm.gcread(i8* %object, i8** %derived) |
| 378 | |
| 379 | For read barriers, LLVM provides the ``llvm.gcread`` intrinsic function. It has |
| 380 | exactly the same semantics as a non-volatile ``load`` from the derived pointer |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 381 | (the second argument). The exact code generated is specified by the Function's |
| 382 | selected :ref:`GC strategy <plugin>`. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 383 | |
| 384 | Read barriers are needed by fewer algorithms than write barriers, and may have a |
| 385 | greater performance impact since pointer reads are more frequent than writes. |
| 386 | |
| 387 | .. _plugin: |
| 388 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 389 | .. _builtin-gc-strategies: |
| 390 | |
| 391 | Built In GC Strategies |
| 392 | ====================== |
| 393 | |
| 394 | LLVM includes built in support for several varieties of garbage collectors. |
| 395 | |
| 396 | The Shadow Stack GC |
| 397 | ---------------------- |
| 398 | |
| 399 | To use this collector strategy, mark your functions with: |
| 400 | |
| 401 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 402 | |
| 403 | F.setGC("shadow-stack"); |
| 404 | |
| 405 | Unlike many GC algorithms which rely on a cooperative code generator to compile |
| 406 | stack maps, this algorithm carefully maintains a linked list of stack roots |
| 407 | [:ref:`Henderson2002 <henderson02>`]. This so-called "shadow stack" mirrors the |
| 408 | machine stack. Maintaining this data structure is slower than using a stack map |
| 409 | compiled into the executable as constant data, but has a significant portability |
| 410 | advantage because it requires no special support from the target code generator, |
| 411 | and does not require tricky platform-specific code to crawl the machine stack. |
| 412 | |
| 413 | The tradeoff for this simplicity and portability is: |
| 414 | |
| 415 | * High overhead per function call. |
| 416 | |
| 417 | * Not thread-safe. |
| 418 | |
| 419 | Still, it's an easy way to get started. After your compiler and runtime are up |
| 420 | and running, writing a :ref:`plugin <plugin>` will allow you to take advantage |
| 421 | of :ref:`more advanced GC features <collector-algos>` of LLVM in order to |
| 422 | improve performance. |
| 423 | |
| 424 | |
| 425 | The shadow stack doesn't imply a memory allocation algorithm. A semispace |
| 426 | collector or building atop ``malloc`` are great places to start, and can be |
| 427 | implemented with very little code. |
| 428 | |
| 429 | When it comes time to collect, however, your runtime needs to traverse the stack |
| 430 | roots, and for this it needs to integrate with the shadow stack. Luckily, doing |
| 431 | so is very simple. (This code is heavily commented to help you understand the |
| 432 | data structure, but there are only 20 lines of meaningful code.) |
| 433 | |
| 434 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 435 | |
| 436 | /// @brief The map for a single function's stack frame. One of these is |
| 437 | /// compiled as constant data into the executable for each function. |
| 438 | /// |
| 439 | /// Storage of metadata values is elided if the %metadata parameter to |
| 440 | /// @llvm.gcroot is null. |
| 441 | struct FrameMap { |
| 442 | int32_t NumRoots; //< Number of roots in stack frame. |
| 443 | int32_t NumMeta; //< Number of metadata entries. May be < NumRoots. |
| 444 | const void *Meta[0]; //< Metadata for each root. |
| 445 | }; |
| 446 | |
| 447 | /// @brief A link in the dynamic shadow stack. One of these is embedded in |
| 448 | /// the stack frame of each function on the call stack. |
| 449 | struct StackEntry { |
| 450 | StackEntry *Next; //< Link to next stack entry (the caller's). |
| 451 | const FrameMap *Map; //< Pointer to constant FrameMap. |
| 452 | void *Roots[0]; //< Stack roots (in-place array). |
| 453 | }; |
| 454 | |
| 455 | /// @brief The head of the singly-linked list of StackEntries. Functions push |
| 456 | /// and pop onto this in their prologue and epilogue. |
| 457 | /// |
| 458 | /// Since there is only a global list, this technique is not threadsafe. |
| 459 | StackEntry *llvm_gc_root_chain; |
| 460 | |
| 461 | /// @brief Calls Visitor(root, meta) for each GC root on the stack. |
| 462 | /// root and meta are exactly the values passed to |
| 463 | /// @llvm.gcroot. |
| 464 | /// |
| 465 | /// Visitor could be a function to recursively mark live objects. Or it |
| 466 | /// might copy them to another heap or generation. |
| 467 | /// |
| 468 | /// @param Visitor A function to invoke for every GC root on the stack. |
| 469 | void visitGCRoots(void (*Visitor)(void **Root, const void *Meta)) { |
| 470 | for (StackEntry *R = llvm_gc_root_chain; R; R = R->Next) { |
| 471 | unsigned i = 0; |
| 472 | |
| 473 | // For roots [0, NumMeta), the metadata pointer is in the FrameMap. |
| 474 | for (unsigned e = R->Map->NumMeta; i != e; ++i) |
| 475 | Visitor(&R->Roots[i], R->Map->Meta[i]); |
| 476 | |
| 477 | // For roots [NumMeta, NumRoots), the metadata pointer is null. |
| 478 | for (unsigned e = R->Map->NumRoots; i != e; ++i) |
| 479 | Visitor(&R->Roots[i], NULL); |
| 480 | } |
| 481 | } |
| 482 | |
| 483 | |
| 484 | The 'Erlang' and 'Ocaml' GCs |
| 485 | ----------------------------- |
| 486 | |
| 487 | LLVM ships with two example collectors which leverage the ``gcroot`` |
| 488 | mechanisms. To our knowledge, these are not actually used by any language |
| 489 | runtime, but they do provide a reasonable starting point for someone interested |
| 490 | in writing an ``gcroot`` compatible GC plugin. In particular, these are the |
| 491 | only in tree examples of how to produce a custom binary stack map format using |
| 492 | a ``gcroot`` strategy. |
| 493 | |
| 494 | As there names imply, the binary format produced is intended to model that |
| 495 | used by the Erlang and OCaml compilers respectively. |
| 496 | |
Pirama Arumuga Nainar | 6948897 | 2015-07-01 12:23:51 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 497 | .. _statepoint_example_gc: |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 498 | |
| 499 | The Statepoint Example GC |
| 500 | ------------------------- |
| 501 | |
| 502 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 503 | |
| 504 | F.setGC("statepoint-example"); |
| 505 | |
| 506 | This GC provides an example of how one might use the infrastructure provided |
| 507 | by ``gc.statepoint``. This example GC is compatible with the |
| 508 | :ref:`PlaceSafepoints` and :ref:`RewriteStatepointsForGC` utility passes |
| 509 | which simplify ``gc.statepoint`` sequence insertion. If you need to build a |
| 510 | custom GC strategy around the ``gc.statepoints`` mechanisms, it is recommended |
| 511 | that you use this one as a starting point. |
| 512 | |
| 513 | This GC strategy does not support read or write barriers. As a result, these |
| 514 | intrinsics are lowered to normal loads and stores. |
| 515 | |
| 516 | The stack map format generated by this GC strategy can be found in the |
| 517 | :ref:`stackmap-section` using a format documented :ref:`here |
| 518 | <statepoint-stackmap-format>`. This format is intended to be the standard |
| 519 | format supported by LLVM going forward. |
| 520 | |
Pirama Arumuga Nainar | 6948897 | 2015-07-01 12:23:51 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 521 | The CoreCLR GC |
| 522 | ------------------------- |
| 523 | |
| 524 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 525 | |
| 526 | F.setGC("coreclr"); |
| 527 | |
| 528 | This GC leverages the ``gc.statepoint`` mechanism to support the |
| 529 | `CoreCLR <https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr>`__ runtime. |
| 530 | |
| 531 | Support for this GC strategy is a work in progress. This strategy will |
| 532 | differ from |
| 533 | :ref:`statepoint-example GC<statepoint_example_gc>` strategy in |
| 534 | certain aspects like: |
| 535 | |
| 536 | * Base-pointers of interior pointers are not explicitly |
| 537 | tracked and reported. |
| 538 | |
| 539 | * A different format is used for encoding stack maps. |
| 540 | |
| 541 | * Safe-point polls are only needed before loop-back edges |
| 542 | and before tail-calls (not needed at function-entry). |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 543 | |
| 544 | Custom GC Strategies |
| 545 | ==================== |
| 546 | |
| 547 | If none of the built in GC strategy descriptions met your needs above, you will |
| 548 | need to define a custom GCStrategy and possibly, a custom LLVM pass to perform |
| 549 | lowering. Your best example of where to start defining a custom GCStrategy |
| 550 | would be to look at one of the built in strategies. |
| 551 | |
| 552 | You may be able to structure this additional code as a loadable plugin library. |
| 553 | Loadable plugins are sufficient if all you need is to enable a different |
| 554 | combination of built in functionality, but if you need to provide a custom |
| 555 | lowering pass, you will need to build a patched version of LLVM. If you think |
| 556 | you need a patched build, please ask for advice on llvm-dev. There may be an |
| 557 | easy way we can extend the support to make it work for your use case without |
| 558 | requiring a custom build. |
| 559 | |
| 560 | Collector Requirements |
| 561 | ---------------------- |
| 562 | |
| 563 | You should be able to leverage any existing collector library that includes the following elements: |
| 564 | |
| 565 | #. A memory allocator which exposes an allocation function your compiled |
| 566 | code can call. |
| 567 | |
| 568 | #. A binary format for the stack map. A stack map describes the location |
| 569 | of references at a safepoint and is used by precise collectors to identify |
| 570 | references within a stack frame on the machine stack. Note that collectors |
| 571 | which conservatively scan the stack don't require such a structure. |
| 572 | |
| 573 | #. A stack crawler to discover functions on the call stack, and enumerate the |
| 574 | references listed in the stack map for each call site. |
| 575 | |
| 576 | #. A mechanism for identifying references in global locations (e.g. global |
| 577 | variables). |
| 578 | |
| 579 | #. If you collector requires them, an LLVM IR implementation of your collectors |
| 580 | load and store barriers. Note that since many collectors don't require |
| 581 | barriers at all, LLVM defaults to lowering such barriers to normal loads |
| 582 | and stores unless you arrange otherwise. |
| 583 | |
| 584 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 585 | Implementing a collector plugin |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 586 | ------------------------------- |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 587 | |
| 588 | User code specifies which GC code generation to use with the ``gc`` function |
| 589 | attribute or, equivalently, with the ``setGC`` method of ``Function``. |
| 590 | |
| 591 | To implement a GC plugin, it is necessary to subclass ``llvm::GCStrategy``, |
| 592 | which can be accomplished in a few lines of boilerplate code. LLVM's |
| 593 | infrastructure provides access to several important algorithms. For an |
| 594 | uncontroversial collector, all that remains may be to compile LLVM's computed |
| 595 | stack map to assembly code (using the binary representation expected by the |
| 596 | runtime library). This can be accomplished in about 100 lines of code. |
| 597 | |
| 598 | This is not the appropriate place to implement a garbage collected heap or a |
| 599 | garbage collector itself. That code should exist in the language's runtime |
| 600 | library. The compiler plugin is responsible for generating code which conforms |
| 601 | to the binary interface defined by library, most essentially the :ref:`stack map |
| 602 | <stack-map>`. |
| 603 | |
| 604 | To subclass ``llvm::GCStrategy`` and register it with the compiler: |
| 605 | |
| 606 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 607 | |
| 608 | // lib/MyGC/MyGC.cpp - Example LLVM GC plugin |
| 609 | |
| 610 | #include "llvm/CodeGen/GCStrategy.h" |
| 611 | #include "llvm/CodeGen/GCMetadata.h" |
| 612 | #include "llvm/Support/Compiler.h" |
| 613 | |
| 614 | using namespace llvm; |
| 615 | |
| 616 | namespace { |
| 617 | class LLVM_LIBRARY_VISIBILITY MyGC : public GCStrategy { |
| 618 | public: |
| 619 | MyGC() {} |
| 620 | }; |
| 621 | |
| 622 | GCRegistry::Add<MyGC> |
| 623 | X("mygc", "My bespoke garbage collector."); |
| 624 | } |
| 625 | |
| 626 | This boilerplate collector does nothing. More specifically: |
| 627 | |
| 628 | * ``llvm.gcread`` calls are replaced with the corresponding ``load`` |
| 629 | instruction. |
| 630 | |
| 631 | * ``llvm.gcwrite`` calls are replaced with the corresponding ``store`` |
| 632 | instruction. |
| 633 | |
| 634 | * No safe points are added to the code. |
| 635 | |
| 636 | * The stack map is not compiled into the executable. |
| 637 | |
Stephen Hines | 36b5688 | 2014-04-23 16:57:46 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 638 | Using the LLVM makefiles, this code |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 639 | can be compiled as a plugin using a simple makefile: |
| 640 | |
| 641 | .. code-block:: make |
| 642 | |
| 643 | # lib/MyGC/Makefile |
| 644 | |
| 645 | LEVEL := ../.. |
| 646 | LIBRARYNAME = MyGC |
| 647 | LOADABLE_MODULE = 1 |
| 648 | |
| 649 | include $(LEVEL)/Makefile.common |
| 650 | |
| 651 | Once the plugin is compiled, code using it may be compiled using ``llc |
| 652 | -load=MyGC.so`` (though MyGC.so may have some other platform-specific |
| 653 | extension): |
| 654 | |
| 655 | :: |
| 656 | |
| 657 | $ cat sample.ll |
| 658 | define void @f() gc "mygc" { |
| 659 | entry: |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 660 | ret void |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 661 | } |
| 662 | $ llvm-as < sample.ll | llc -load=MyGC.so |
| 663 | |
| 664 | It is also possible to statically link the collector plugin into tools, such as |
| 665 | a language-specific compiler front-end. |
| 666 | |
| 667 | .. _collector-algos: |
| 668 | |
| 669 | Overview of available features |
| 670 | ------------------------------ |
| 671 | |
| 672 | ``GCStrategy`` provides a range of features through which a plugin may do useful |
| 673 | work. Some of these are callbacks, some are algorithms that can be enabled, |
| 674 | disabled, or customized. This matrix summarizes the supported (and planned) |
| 675 | features and correlates them with the collection techniques which typically |
| 676 | require them. |
| 677 | |
| 678 | .. |v| unicode:: 0x2714 |
| 679 | :trim: |
| 680 | |
| 681 | .. |x| unicode:: 0x2718 |
| 682 | :trim: |
| 683 | |
| 684 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 685 | | Algorithm | Done | Shadow | refcount | mark- | copying | incremental | threaded | concurrent | |
| 686 | | | | stack | | sweep | | | | | |
| 687 | +============+======+========+==========+=======+=========+=============+==========+============+ |
| 688 | | stack map | |v| | | | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |
| 689 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 690 | | initialize | |v| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |
| 691 | | roots | | | | | | | | | |
| 692 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 693 | | derived | NO | | | | | | **N**\* | **N**\* | |
| 694 | | pointers | | | | | | | | | |
| 695 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 696 | | **custom | |v| | | | | | | | | |
| 697 | | lowering** | | | | | | | | | |
| 698 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 699 | | *gcroot* | |v| | |x| | |x| | | | | | | |
| 700 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 701 | | *gcwrite* | |v| | | |x| | | | |x| | | |x| | |
| 702 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 703 | | *gcread* | |v| | | | | | | | |x| | |
| 704 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 705 | | **safe | | | | | | | | | |
| 706 | | points** | | | | | | | | | |
| 707 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 708 | | *in | |v| | | | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |
| 709 | | calls* | | | | | | | | | |
| 710 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 711 | | *before | |v| | | | | | | |x| | |x| | |
| 712 | | calls* | | | | | | | | | |
| 713 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 714 | | *for | NO | | | | | | **N** | **N** | |
| 715 | | loops* | | | | | | | | | |
| 716 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 717 | | *before | |v| | | | | | | |x| | |x| | |
| 718 | | escape* | | | | | | | | | |
| 719 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 720 | | emit code | NO | | | | | | **N** | **N** | |
| 721 | | at safe | | | | | | | | | |
| 722 | | points | | | | | | | | | |
| 723 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 724 | | **output** | | | | | | | | | |
| 725 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 726 | | *assembly* | |v| | | | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |
| 727 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 728 | | *JIT* | NO | | | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | |
| 729 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 730 | | *obj* | NO | | | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | |
| 731 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 732 | | live | NO | | | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | |
| 733 | | analysis | | | | | | | | | |
| 734 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 735 | | register | NO | | | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | |
| 736 | | map | | | | | | | | | |
| 737 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 738 | | \* Derived pointers only pose a hasard to copying collections. | |
| 739 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 740 | | **?** denotes a feature which could be utilized if available. | |
| 741 | +------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+ |
| 742 | |
| 743 | To be clear, the collection techniques above are defined as: |
| 744 | |
| 745 | Shadow Stack |
| 746 | The mutator carefully maintains a linked list of stack roots. |
| 747 | |
| 748 | Reference Counting |
| 749 | The mutator maintains a reference count for each object and frees an object |
| 750 | when its count falls to zero. |
| 751 | |
| 752 | Mark-Sweep |
| 753 | When the heap is exhausted, the collector marks reachable objects starting |
| 754 | from the roots, then deallocates unreachable objects in a sweep phase. |
| 755 | |
| 756 | Copying |
| 757 | As reachability analysis proceeds, the collector copies objects from one heap |
| 758 | area to another, compacting them in the process. Copying collectors enable |
| 759 | highly efficient "bump pointer" allocation and can improve locality of |
| 760 | reference. |
| 761 | |
| 762 | Incremental |
| 763 | (Including generational collectors.) Incremental collectors generally have all |
| 764 | the properties of a copying collector (regardless of whether the mature heap |
| 765 | is compacting), but bring the added complexity of requiring write barriers. |
| 766 | |
| 767 | Threaded |
| 768 | Denotes a multithreaded mutator; the collector must still stop the mutator |
| 769 | ("stop the world") before beginning reachability analysis. Stopping a |
| 770 | multithreaded mutator is a complicated problem. It generally requires highly |
Stephen Hines | c6a4f5e | 2014-07-21 00:45:20 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 771 | platform-specific code in the runtime, and the production of carefully |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 772 | designed machine code at safe points. |
| 773 | |
| 774 | Concurrent |
| 775 | In this technique, the mutator and the collector run concurrently, with the |
| 776 | goal of eliminating pause times. In a *cooperative* collector, the mutator |
| 777 | further aids with collection should a pause occur, allowing collection to take |
| 778 | advantage of multiprocessor hosts. The "stop the world" problem of threaded |
| 779 | collectors is generally still present to a limited extent. Sophisticated |
| 780 | marking algorithms are necessary. Read barriers may be necessary. |
| 781 | |
| 782 | As the matrix indicates, LLVM's garbage collection infrastructure is already |
| 783 | suitable for a wide variety of collectors, but does not currently extend to |
| 784 | multithreaded programs. This will be added in the future as there is |
| 785 | interest. |
| 786 | |
| 787 | .. _stack-map: |
| 788 | |
| 789 | Computing stack maps |
| 790 | -------------------- |
| 791 | |
| 792 | LLVM automatically computes a stack map. One of the most important features |
| 793 | of a ``GCStrategy`` is to compile this information into the executable in |
| 794 | the binary representation expected by the runtime library. |
| 795 | |
| 796 | The stack map consists of the location and identity of each GC root in the |
| 797 | each function in the module. For each root: |
| 798 | |
| 799 | * ``RootNum``: The index of the root. |
| 800 | |
| 801 | * ``StackOffset``: The offset of the object relative to the frame pointer. |
| 802 | |
| 803 | * ``RootMetadata``: The value passed as the ``%metadata`` parameter to the |
| 804 | ``@llvm.gcroot`` intrinsic. |
| 805 | |
| 806 | Also, for the function as a whole: |
| 807 | |
| 808 | * ``getFrameSize()``: The overall size of the function's initial stack frame, |
| 809 | not accounting for any dynamic allocation. |
| 810 | |
| 811 | * ``roots_size()``: The count of roots in the function. |
| 812 | |
| 813 | To access the stack map, use ``GCFunctionMetadata::roots_begin()`` and |
| 814 | -``end()`` from the :ref:`GCMetadataPrinter <assembly>`: |
| 815 | |
| 816 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 817 | |
| 818 | for (iterator I = begin(), E = end(); I != E; ++I) { |
| 819 | GCFunctionInfo *FI = *I; |
| 820 | unsigned FrameSize = FI->getFrameSize(); |
| 821 | size_t RootCount = FI->roots_size(); |
| 822 | |
| 823 | for (GCFunctionInfo::roots_iterator RI = FI->roots_begin(), |
| 824 | RE = FI->roots_end(); |
| 825 | RI != RE; ++RI) { |
| 826 | int RootNum = RI->Num; |
| 827 | int RootStackOffset = RI->StackOffset; |
| 828 | Constant *RootMetadata = RI->Metadata; |
| 829 | } |
| 830 | } |
| 831 | |
| 832 | If the ``llvm.gcroot`` intrinsic is eliminated before code generation by a |
| 833 | custom lowering pass, LLVM will compute an empty stack map. This may be useful |
| 834 | for collector plugins which implement reference counting or a shadow stack. |
| 835 | |
| 836 | .. _init-roots: |
| 837 | |
| 838 | Initializing roots to null: ``InitRoots`` |
| 839 | ----------------------------------------- |
| 840 | |
| 841 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 842 | |
| 843 | MyGC::MyGC() { |
| 844 | InitRoots = true; |
| 845 | } |
| 846 | |
| 847 | When set, LLVM will automatically initialize each root to ``null`` upon entry to |
| 848 | the function. This prevents the GC's sweep phase from visiting uninitialized |
| 849 | pointers, which will almost certainly cause it to crash. This initialization |
| 850 | occurs before custom lowering, so the two may be used together. |
| 851 | |
| 852 | Since LLVM does not yet compute liveness information, there is no means of |
| 853 | distinguishing an uninitialized stack root from an initialized one. Therefore, |
| 854 | this feature should be used by all GC plugins. It is enabled by default. |
| 855 | |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 856 | Custom lowering of intrinsics: ``CustomRoots``, ``CustomReadBarriers``, and ``CustomWriteBarriers`` |
| 857 | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 858 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 859 | For GCs which use barriers or unusual treatment of stack roots, these |
| 860 | flags allow the collector to perform arbitrary transformations of the |
| 861 | LLVM IR: |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 862 | |
| 863 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 864 | |
| 865 | class MyGC : public GCStrategy { |
| 866 | public: |
| 867 | MyGC() { |
| 868 | CustomRoots = true; |
| 869 | CustomReadBarriers = true; |
| 870 | CustomWriteBarriers = true; |
| 871 | } |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 872 | }; |
| 873 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 874 | If any of these flags are set, LLVM suppresses its default lowering for |
| 875 | the corresponding intrinsics. Instead, you must provide a custom Pass |
| 876 | which lowers the intrinsics as desired. If you have opted in to custom |
| 877 | lowering of a particular intrinsic your pass **must** eliminate all |
| 878 | instances of the corresponding intrinsic in functions which opt in to |
| 879 | your GC. The best example of such a pass is the ShadowStackGC and it's |
| 880 | ShadowStackGCLowering pass. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 881 | |
Stephen Hines | ebe69fe | 2015-03-23 12:10:34 -0700 | [diff] [blame] | 882 | There is currently no way to register such a custom lowering pass |
| 883 | without building a custom copy of LLVM. |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 884 | |
| 885 | .. _safe-points: |
| 886 | |
| 887 | Generating safe points: ``NeededSafePoints`` |
| 888 | -------------------------------------------- |
| 889 | |
| 890 | LLVM can compute four kinds of safe points: |
| 891 | |
| 892 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 893 | |
| 894 | namespace GC { |
| 895 | /// PointKind - The type of a collector-safe point. |
| 896 | /// |
| 897 | enum PointKind { |
| 898 | Loop, //< Instr is a loop (backwards branch). |
| 899 | Return, //< Instr is a return instruction. |
| 900 | PreCall, //< Instr is a call instruction. |
| 901 | PostCall //< Instr is the return address of a call. |
| 902 | }; |
| 903 | } |
| 904 | |
| 905 | A collector can request any combination of the four by setting the |
| 906 | ``NeededSafePoints`` mask: |
| 907 | |
| 908 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 909 | |
| 910 | MyGC::MyGC() { |
| 911 | NeededSafePoints = 1 << GC::Loop |
| 912 | | 1 << GC::Return |
| 913 | | 1 << GC::PreCall |
| 914 | | 1 << GC::PostCall; |
| 915 | } |
| 916 | |
| 917 | It can then use the following routines to access safe points. |
| 918 | |
| 919 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 920 | |
| 921 | for (iterator I = begin(), E = end(); I != E; ++I) { |
| 922 | GCFunctionInfo *MD = *I; |
| 923 | size_t PointCount = MD->size(); |
| 924 | |
| 925 | for (GCFunctionInfo::iterator PI = MD->begin(), |
| 926 | PE = MD->end(); PI != PE; ++PI) { |
| 927 | GC::PointKind PointKind = PI->Kind; |
| 928 | unsigned PointNum = PI->Num; |
| 929 | } |
| 930 | } |
| 931 | |
| 932 | Almost every collector requires ``PostCall`` safe points, since these correspond |
| 933 | to the moments when the function is suspended during a call to a subroutine. |
| 934 | |
| 935 | Threaded programs generally require ``Loop`` safe points to guarantee that the |
| 936 | application will reach a safe point within a bounded amount of time, even if it |
| 937 | is executing a long-running loop which contains no function calls. |
| 938 | |
| 939 | Threaded collectors may also require ``Return`` and ``PreCall`` safe points to |
| 940 | implement "stop the world" techniques using self-modifying code, where it is |
| 941 | important that the program not exit the function without reaching a safe point |
| 942 | (because only the topmost function has been patched). |
| 943 | |
| 944 | .. _assembly: |
| 945 | |
| 946 | Emitting assembly code: ``GCMetadataPrinter`` |
| 947 | --------------------------------------------- |
| 948 | |
| 949 | LLVM allows a plugin to print arbitrary assembly code before and after the rest |
| 950 | of a module's assembly code. At the end of the module, the GC can compile the |
| 951 | LLVM stack map into assembly code. (At the beginning, this information is not |
| 952 | yet computed.) |
| 953 | |
| 954 | Since AsmWriter and CodeGen are separate components of LLVM, a separate abstract |
| 955 | base class and registry is provided for printing assembly code, the |
| 956 | ``GCMetadaPrinter`` and ``GCMetadataPrinterRegistry``. The AsmWriter will look |
| 957 | for such a subclass if the ``GCStrategy`` sets ``UsesMetadata``: |
| 958 | |
| 959 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 960 | |
| 961 | MyGC::MyGC() { |
| 962 | UsesMetadata = true; |
| 963 | } |
| 964 | |
| 965 | This separation allows JIT-only clients to be smaller. |
| 966 | |
| 967 | Note that LLVM does not currently have analogous APIs to support code generation |
| 968 | in the JIT, nor using the object writers. |
| 969 | |
| 970 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 971 | |
| 972 | // lib/MyGC/MyGCPrinter.cpp - Example LLVM GC printer |
| 973 | |
| 974 | #include "llvm/CodeGen/GCMetadataPrinter.h" |
| 975 | #include "llvm/Support/Compiler.h" |
| 976 | |
| 977 | using namespace llvm; |
| 978 | |
| 979 | namespace { |
| 980 | class LLVM_LIBRARY_VISIBILITY MyGCPrinter : public GCMetadataPrinter { |
| 981 | public: |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 982 | virtual void beginAssembly(AsmPrinter &AP); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 983 | |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 984 | virtual void finishAssembly(AsmPrinter &AP); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 985 | }; |
| 986 | |
| 987 | GCMetadataPrinterRegistry::Add<MyGCPrinter> |
| 988 | X("mygc", "My bespoke garbage collector."); |
| 989 | } |
| 990 | |
Bill Wendling | 68ad65c | 2013-10-18 23:11:25 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 991 | The collector should use ``AsmPrinter`` to print portable assembly code. The |
| 992 | collector itself contains the stack map for the entire module, and may access |
| 993 | the ``GCFunctionInfo`` using its own ``begin()`` and ``end()`` methods. Here's |
| 994 | a realistic example: |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 995 | |
| 996 | .. code-block:: c++ |
| 997 | |
| 998 | #include "llvm/CodeGen/AsmPrinter.h" |
Benjamin Kramer | e5a532d | 2013-07-08 19:59:35 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 999 | #include "llvm/IR/Function.h" |
| 1000 | #include "llvm/IR/DataLayout.h" |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1001 | #include "llvm/Target/TargetAsmInfo.h" |
Benjamin Kramer | e5a532d | 2013-07-08 19:59:35 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1002 | #include "llvm/Target/TargetMachine.h" |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1003 | |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1004 | void MyGCPrinter::beginAssembly(AsmPrinter &AP) { |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1005 | // Nothing to do. |
| 1006 | } |
| 1007 | |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1008 | void MyGCPrinter::finishAssembly(AsmPrinter &AP) { |
| 1009 | MCStreamer &OS = AP.OutStreamer; |
Stephen Hines | 37ed9c1 | 2014-12-01 14:51:49 -0800 | [diff] [blame] | 1010 | unsigned IntPtrSize = AP.TM.getSubtargetImpl()->getDataLayout()->getPointerSize(); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1011 | |
| 1012 | // Put this in the data section. |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1013 | OS.SwitchSection(AP.getObjFileLowering().getDataSection()); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1014 | |
| 1015 | // For each function... |
| 1016 | for (iterator FI = begin(), FE = end(); FI != FE; ++FI) { |
| 1017 | GCFunctionInfo &MD = **FI; |
| 1018 | |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1019 | // A compact GC layout. Emit this data structure: |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1020 | // |
| 1021 | // struct { |
| 1022 | // int32_t PointCount; |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1023 | // void *SafePointAddress[PointCount]; |
| 1024 | // int32_t StackFrameSize; // in words |
| 1025 | // int32_t StackArity; |
| 1026 | // int32_t LiveCount; |
| 1027 | // int32_t LiveOffsets[LiveCount]; |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1028 | // } __gcmap_<FUNCTIONNAME>; |
| 1029 | |
| 1030 | // Align to address width. |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1031 | AP.EmitAlignment(IntPtrSize == 4 ? 2 : 3); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1032 | |
| 1033 | // Emit PointCount. |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1034 | OS.AddComment("safe point count"); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1035 | AP.EmitInt32(MD.size()); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1036 | |
| 1037 | // And each safe point... |
| 1038 | for (GCFunctionInfo::iterator PI = MD.begin(), |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1039 | PE = MD.end(); PI != PE; ++PI) { |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1040 | // Emit the address of the safe point. |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1041 | OS.AddComment("safe point address"); |
| 1042 | MCSymbol *Label = PI->Label; |
| 1043 | AP.EmitLabelPlusOffset(Label/*Hi*/, 0/*Offset*/, 4/*Size*/); |
| 1044 | } |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1045 | |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1046 | // Stack information never change in safe points! Only print info from the |
| 1047 | // first call-site. |
| 1048 | GCFunctionInfo::iterator PI = MD.begin(); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1049 | |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1050 | // Emit the stack frame size. |
| 1051 | OS.AddComment("stack frame size (in words)"); |
| 1052 | AP.EmitInt32(MD.getFrameSize() / IntPtrSize); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1053 | |
Bill Wendling | 3cfe719 | 2013-10-18 23:09:06 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1054 | // Emit stack arity, i.e. the number of stacked arguments. |
| 1055 | unsigned RegisteredArgs = IntPtrSize == 4 ? 5 : 6; |
| 1056 | unsigned StackArity = MD.getFunction().arg_size() > RegisteredArgs ? |
| 1057 | MD.getFunction().arg_size() - RegisteredArgs : 0; |
| 1058 | OS.AddComment("stack arity"); |
| 1059 | AP.EmitInt32(StackArity); |
| 1060 | |
| 1061 | // Emit the number of live roots in the function. |
| 1062 | OS.AddComment("live root count"); |
| 1063 | AP.EmitInt32(MD.live_size(PI)); |
| 1064 | |
| 1065 | // And for each live root... |
| 1066 | for (GCFunctionInfo::live_iterator LI = MD.live_begin(PI), |
| 1067 | LE = MD.live_end(PI); |
| 1068 | LI != LE; ++LI) { |
| 1069 | // Emit live root's offset within the stack frame. |
| 1070 | OS.AddComment("stack index (offset / wordsize)"); |
| 1071 | AP.EmitInt32(LI->StackOffset); |
Sean Silva | 691f470 | 2012-12-09 15:52:47 +0000 | [diff] [blame] | 1072 | } |
| 1073 | } |
| 1074 | } |
| 1075 | |
| 1076 | References |
| 1077 | ========== |
| 1078 | |
| 1079 | .. _appel89: |
| 1080 | |
| 1081 | [Appel89] Runtime Tags Aren't Necessary. Andrew W. Appel. Lisp and Symbolic |
| 1082 | Computation 19(7):703-705, July 1989. |
| 1083 | |
| 1084 | .. _goldberg91: |
| 1085 | |
| 1086 | [Goldberg91] Tag-free garbage collection for strongly typed programming |
| 1087 | languages. Benjamin Goldberg. ACM SIGPLAN PLDI'91. |
| 1088 | |
| 1089 | .. _tolmach94: |
| 1090 | |
| 1091 | [Tolmach94] Tag-free garbage collection using explicit type parameters. Andrew |
| 1092 | Tolmach. Proceedings of the 1994 ACM conference on LISP and functional |
| 1093 | programming. |
| 1094 | |
| 1095 | .. _henderson02: |
| 1096 | |
| 1097 | [Henderson2002] `Accurate Garbage Collection in an Uncooperative Environment |
| 1098 | <http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/henderson02accurate.html>`__ |