COMPOUND-OBJECT-P, and (LABELS MAYBE-EMIT-MAKE-LOAD-FORMS GROVEL)
through TYPEP UNBOXED-ARRAY, within the compiler itself.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-#18
-(lambda (x) (declare (null x)) (sxhash x)) goes through SYMBOL-HASH
-rather than either constant-folding or manipulating NIL-VALUE or
-NULL-TN directly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-#19
- (let ((dx (if (foo)
- (list x)
- (list y z))))
- (declare (dynamic-extent dx))
- ...)
-
-DX is not allocated on stack.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#20
(defun-with-dx foo (x)
(flet ((make (x)
(declare (dynamic-extent l))
(mapc #'print l))))
-Result of MAKE is not stack allocated, which means that
-stack-allocation of structures is impossible.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-#21
-(defun-with-dx foo ()
- (let ((dx (list (list 1 2) (list 3 4))))
- (declare (dynamic-extent dx))
- ...))
-
-External list in DX is allocated on stack, but internal are not.
+Result of MAKE is not stack allocated.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#22
IR2 does not perform unused code flushing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-#23
-Python does not know that &REST lists are LISTs (and cannot derive it).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#24
-a. Iterations on &REST lists, returning them as VALUES could be
- rewritten with &MORE vectors.
+a. Iterations on &REST lists could be rewritten with &MORE vectors.
b. Implement local unknown-values mv-call (useful for fast type checking).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#26
fill the vector with zeroes, even when it is not needed (as for
platforms with conservative GC or for arrays of unboxed objectes) and
is performed later explicitely.
+
+(This is harder than it might look at first glance, as MAKE-ARRAY is smart
+enough to eliminate something like ':initial-element 0'. Such an optimization
+is valid if the vector is being allocated in the heap, but not if it is being
+allocated on the stack. You could remove this optimization, but that makes
+the heap-allocated case somewhat slower...)
+
+To do this, extend ALLOCATE-VECTOR with ALLOW-JUNK argument, and when
+stack allocating don't zero if it is true -- and probably ALLOW-JUNK iff
+the vector is a specialized one (cannot have pointers.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
#28
a. Accessing raw slots in structure instances is more inefficient than
src/compiler/ir1opt.lisp, IR1-OPTIMIZE-COMBINATION. The above
optimizations are left as an exercise for the reader.)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-#30
-(defun foo (x y)
- (< x y))
+#31
+The typecheck generated for a declaration like (integer 0 45) on x86 looks
+like:
+
+; 12B: F6C203 TEST DL, 3
+; 12E: 753B JNE L1
+; 130: 8BC2 MOV EAX, EDX
+; 132: 83F800 CMP EAX, 0
+; 135: 7C34 JL L1
+; 137: 8BC2 MOV EAX, EDX
+; 139: 3DB4000000 CMP EAX, 180
+; 13E: 7F2B JNLE L1
+
+A better code sequence for this would be:
+
+ TEST DL, 3
+ JNE L1
+ MOV EAX, EDX
+ CMP EAX, 180
+ JBE L1
+
+Doing an unsigned comparison means that, similarly to %CHECK-BOUND, we can
+combine the <0 and >=bound tests. This sort of test is generated often
+in SBCL and any array-based code that's serious about type-checking its
+indices.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+#32
+The code for a vector bounds check on x86 (similarly on x86-64) where
+the vector is in EDX and the index in EAX looks like:
+
+; 49: L0: 8B5AFD MOV EBX, [EDX-3]
+; 4C: 39C3 CMP EBX, EAX
+; 4E: 7632 JBE L2
+
+because %CHECK-BOUND is used for bounds-checking any array dimension.
+A more efficient specialization (%CHECK-BOUND/VECTOR) would produce:
+
+ CMP [EDX-3], EAX
+ JBE L2
+
+Which is slightly shorter and avoids using a register.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+#33
+Reports from the Java camp indicate that using an SSE2-based
+floating-point backend on x86 when possible is highly preferable to
+using the x86 FP stack. It would be nice if SBCL included an SSE2-based
+floating point backend with a compile-time option to switch between the
+two.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+#35
+Compiling
+
+(defun foo (a i)
+ (declare (type simple-vector a))
+ (aref a i))
+
+results in the following x86 code:
+
+; 115886E9: F7C703000000 TEST EDI, 3 ; no-arg-parsing entry point
+; 6EF: 7510 JNE L0
+; 6F1: 8BC7 MOV EAX, EDI
+; 6F3: 83F800 CMP EAX, 0
+; 6F6: 7C09 JL L0
+; 6F8: 8BC7 MOV EAX, EDI
+; 6FA: 3DF8FFFF7F CMP EAX, 2147483640
+; 6FF: 7E0F JLE L1
+; 701: L0: 8B057C865811 MOV EAX, [#x1158867C] ; '(MOD
+ ; 536870911)
+; 707: 0F0B0A BREAK 10 ; error trap
+; 70A: 05 BYTE #X05
+; 70B: 1F BYTE #X1F ; OBJECT-NOT-TYPE-ERROR
+; 70C: FECE01 BYTE #XFE, #XCE, #X01 ; EDI
+; 70F: 0E BYTE #X0E ; EAX
+; 710: L1: 8B42FD MOV EAX, [EDX-3]
+; 713: 8BCF MOV ECX, EDI
+; 715: 39C8 CMP EAX, ECX
+; 717: 7620 JBE L2
+; 719: 8B540A01 MOV EDX, [EDX+ECX+1]
+
+... plus the standard return sequence and some error blocks. The
+`TEST EDI, 3' and associated comparisons are to ensure that `I' is a
+positive fixnum. The associated comparisons are unnecessary, as the
+%CHECK-BOUND VOP only requires its tested index to be a fixnum and takes
+care of the negative fixnum case itself.
+
+{HAIRY-,}DATA-VECTOR-REF are DEFKNOWN'd with EXPLICIT-CHECK, which would
+seem to take care of this, but EXPLICIT-CHECK only seems to be used when
+compiling calls to unknown functions or similar. Furthermore,
+EXPLICIT-CHECK, as NJF understands it, doesn't have the right
+semantics--it suppresses all type checking of arguments, whereas what we
+really want is to ensure that the argument is a fixnum, but not check
+its positiveness.
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+#36
+
+In #35, the CMP EAX, $foo instructions are all preceded by a MOV. They
+appear to be unnecessary, but are necessary because in IR2, EDI is a
+DESCRIPTOR-REG, whereas EAX is an ANY-REG--and the comparison VOPs only
+accept ANY-REGs. Therefore, the MOVs are "necessary" to ensure that the
+comparison VOP receives an TN of the appropriate storage class.
+
+Obviously, it would be better if a) we only performed one MOV prior to
+all three comparisons or b) eliminated the necessity of the MOV(s)
+altogether. The former option is probably easier than the latter.
+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+#38
+
+(setf (subseq s1 start1 end1) (subseq s2 start2 end1))
+
+could be transformed into
+
+(let ((#:s2 s2)
+ (#:start2 start2)
+ (#:end2 end2))
+ (replace s1 #:s2 :start1 start1 :end1 end1 :start2 #:start2 :end2 #:end2))
+
+when the return value is unused, avoiding the need to cons up the new sequence.
+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+#39
+
+(let ((*foo* 42)) ...)
+
+currently compiles to code that ensures the TLS index at runtime, which
+is both a decently large chunk of code and unnecessary, as we could ensure
+the TLS index at load-time as well.
+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+#40
+
+When FTYPE is declared -- to say (function (t t t t t) t), and
+function has a compiler-macro,
+
+ (apply #'foo 'x1 x2 'x3 more)
+
+can be transformed into
+
+ (apply (lambda (x2 x4 x5) (foo 'x1 x2 'x3 x4 x5)) x2 more)
+
+which allows compiler-macro-expansion for FOO. (Only constant
+arguments can be moved inside the new lambda -- otherwise evaluation
+order is altered.)
+
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+#41
+
+The unibyte external formats are written in a very generic way. Three
+optimizations immediately applicable that could be automatically
+generated:
-FOO's IR1 representation is roughly:
+(a) if the external format merely permutes the first 256 characters, a
+ constant-time lookup (rather than a binary search) could be
+ performed on output. This applies at least to EBCDIC, which
+ currently has a hand-rolled mapper instead.
-(defun foo (x y)
- (if (< x y)
- T
- NIL))
+(b) if there are no undefined characters corresponding to the 256
+ codes, then no error checking need be done on input.
-However, if a full call is generated for < (and similarly for other
-predicate functions), then the IF is unnecessary, since the return value
-of (< x y) is already T or NIL.
+(c) if there is a way to use particular bits of the exceptional
+ characters, constant-time output (rather than binary search) can
+ still be achieved as used to be done by the latin-9 external
+ format before 1.0.31.
projects / sbcl.git / blobdiff