2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
=====================================
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
Garbage Collection with LLVM
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
=====================================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. contents::
|
|
|
|
:local:
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
========
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
This document covers how to integrate LLVM into a compiler for a language which
|
|
|
|
supports garbage collection. **Note that LLVM itself does not provide a
|
|
|
|
garbage collector.** You must provide your own.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
Quick Start
|
|
|
|
============
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
First, you should pick a collector strategy. LLVM includes a number of built
|
|
|
|
in ones, but you can also implement a loadable plugin with a custom definition.
|
|
|
|
Note that the collector strategy is a description of how LLVM should generate
|
|
|
|
code such that it interacts with your collector and runtime, not a description
|
|
|
|
of the collector itself.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
Next, mark your generated functions as using your chosen collector strategy.
|
|
|
|
From c++, you can call:
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
F.setGC(<collector description name>);
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
This will produce IR like the following fragment:
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
.. code-block:: llvm
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
define void @foo() gc "<collector description name>" { ... }
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
When generating LLVM IR for your functions, you will need to:
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
* Use ``@llvm.gcread`` and/or ``@llvm.gcwrite`` in place of standard load and
|
|
|
|
store instructions. These intrinsics are used to represent load and store
|
|
|
|
barriers. If you collector does not require such barriers, you can skip
|
|
|
|
this step.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
* Use the memory allocation routines provided by your garbage collector's
|
|
|
|
runtime library.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
* If your collector requires them, generate type maps according to your
|
|
|
|
runtime's binary interface. LLVM is not involved in the process. In
|
|
|
|
particular, the LLVM type system is not suitable for conveying such
|
|
|
|
information though the compiler.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
* Insert any coordination code required for interacting with your collector.
|
|
|
|
Many collectors require running application code to periodically check a
|
|
|
|
flag and conditionally call a runtime function. This is often referred to
|
|
|
|
as a safepoint poll.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
You will need to identify roots (i.e. references to heap objects your collector
|
|
|
|
needs to know about) in your generated IR, so that LLVM can encode them into
|
|
|
|
your final stack maps. Depending on the collector strategy chosen, this is
|
2015-02-25 00:22:07 +00:00
|
|
|
accomplished by using either the ``@llvm.gcroot`` intrinsics or an
|
|
|
|
``gc.statepoint`` relocation sequence.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
Don't forget to create a root for each intermediate value that is generated when
|
|
|
|
evaluating an expression. In ``h(f(), g())``, the result of ``f()`` could
|
|
|
|
easily be collected if evaluating ``g()`` triggers a collection.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
Finally, you need to link your runtime library with the generated program
|
|
|
|
executable (for a static compiler) or ensure the appropriate symbols are
|
|
|
|
available for the runtime linker (for a JIT compiler).
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introduction
|
|
|
|
============
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
What is Garbage Collection?
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
---------------------------
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
Garbage collection is a widely used technique that frees the programmer from
|
|
|
|
having to know the lifetimes of heap objects, making software easier to produce
|
|
|
|
and maintain. Many programming languages rely on garbage collection for
|
|
|
|
automatic memory management. There are two primary forms of garbage collection:
|
|
|
|
conservative and accurate.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conservative garbage collection often does not require any special support from
|
|
|
|
either the language or the compiler: it can handle non-type-safe programming
|
|
|
|
languages (such as C/C++) and does not require any special information from the
|
|
|
|
compiler. The `Boehm collector
|
|
|
|
<http://www.hpl.hp.com/personal/Hans_Boehm/gc/>`__ is an example of a
|
|
|
|
state-of-the-art conservative collector.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accurate garbage collection requires the ability to identify all pointers in the
|
|
|
|
program at run-time (which requires that the source-language be type-safe in
|
|
|
|
most cases). Identifying pointers at run-time requires compiler support to
|
|
|
|
locate all places that hold live pointer variables at run-time, including the
|
|
|
|
:ref:`processor stack and registers <gcroot>`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conservative garbage collection is attractive because it does not require any
|
|
|
|
special compiler support, but it does have problems. In particular, because the
|
|
|
|
conservative garbage collector cannot *know* that a particular word in the
|
|
|
|
machine is a pointer, it cannot move live objects in the heap (preventing the
|
|
|
|
use of compacting and generational GC algorithms) and it can occasionally suffer
|
|
|
|
from memory leaks due to integer values that happen to point to objects in the
|
|
|
|
program. In addition, some aggressive compiler transformations can break
|
|
|
|
conservative garbage collectors (though these seem rare in practice).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accurate garbage collectors do not suffer from any of these problems, but they
|
|
|
|
can suffer from degraded scalar optimization of the program. In particular,
|
|
|
|
because the runtime must be able to identify and update all pointers active in
|
|
|
|
the program, some optimizations are less effective. In practice, however, the
|
|
|
|
locality and performance benefits of using aggressive garbage collection
|
|
|
|
techniques dominates any low-level losses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This document describes the mechanisms and interfaces provided by LLVM to
|
|
|
|
support accurate garbage collection.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Goals and non-goals
|
|
|
|
-------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LLVM's intermediate representation provides :ref:`garbage collection intrinsics
|
|
|
|
<gc_intrinsics>` that offer support for a broad class of collector models. For
|
|
|
|
instance, the intrinsics permit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* semi-space collectors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* mark-sweep collectors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* generational collectors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* incremental collectors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* concurrent collectors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* cooperative collectors
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
* reference counting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We hope that the support built into the LLVM IR is sufficient to support a
|
|
|
|
broad class of garbage collected languages including Scheme, ML, Java, C#,
|
|
|
|
Perl, Python, Lua, Ruby, other scripting languages, and more.
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
Note that LLVM **does not itself provide a garbage collector** --- this should
|
|
|
|
be part of your language's runtime library. LLVM provides a framework for
|
|
|
|
describing the garbage collectors requirements to the compiler. In particular,
|
|
|
|
LLVM provides support for generating stack maps at call sites, polling for a
|
|
|
|
safepoint, and emitting load and store barriers. You can also extend LLVM -
|
|
|
|
possibly through a loadable :ref:`code generation plugins <plugin>` - to
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
generate code and data structures which conforms to the *binary interface*
|
|
|
|
specified by the *runtime library*. This is similar to the relationship between
|
|
|
|
LLVM and DWARF debugging info, for example. The difference primarily lies in
|
|
|
|
the lack of an established standard in the domain of garbage collection --- thus
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
the need for a flexible extension mechanism.
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The aspects of the binary interface with which LLVM's GC support is
|
|
|
|
concerned are:
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
* Creation of GC safepoints within code where collection is allowed to execute
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
safely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Computation of the stack map. For each safe point in the code, object
|
|
|
|
references within the stack frame must be identified so that the collector may
|
|
|
|
traverse and perhaps update them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Write barriers when storing object references to the heap. These are commonly
|
|
|
|
used to optimize incremental scans in generational collectors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Emission of read barriers when loading object references. These are useful
|
|
|
|
for interoperating with concurrent collectors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There are additional areas that LLVM does not directly address:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Registration of global roots with the runtime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Registration of stack map entries with the runtime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* The functions used by the program to allocate memory, trigger a collection,
|
|
|
|
etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Computation or compilation of type maps, or registration of them with the
|
|
|
|
runtime. These are used to crawl the heap for object references.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In general, LLVM's support for GC does not include features which can be
|
|
|
|
adequately addressed with other features of the IR and does not specify a
|
|
|
|
particular binary interface. On the plus side, this means that you should be
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
able to integrate LLVM with an existing runtime. On the other hand, it can
|
|
|
|
have the effect of leaving a lot of work for the developer of a novel
|
|
|
|
language. We try to mitigate this by providing built in collector strategy
|
|
|
|
descriptions that can work with many common collector designs and easy
|
|
|
|
extension points. If you don't already have a specific binary interface
|
|
|
|
you need to support, we recommend trying to use one of these built in collector
|
|
|
|
strategies.
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
.. _gc_intrinsics:
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
LLVM IR Features
|
|
|
|
================
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This section describes the garbage collection facilities provided by the
|
|
|
|
:doc:`LLVM intermediate representation <LangRef>`. The exact behavior of these
|
2015-02-24 23:51:37 +00:00
|
|
|
IR features is specified by the selected :ref:`GC strategy description
|
|
|
|
<plugin>`.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specifying GC code generation: ``gc "..."``
|
|
|
|
-------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: llvm
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:51:37 +00:00
|
|
|
define <returntype> @name(...) gc "name" { ... }
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:51:37 +00:00
|
|
|
The ``gc`` function attribute is used to specify the desired GC strategy to the
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
compiler. Its programmatic equivalent is the ``setGC`` method of ``Function``.
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:51:37 +00:00
|
|
|
Setting ``gc "name"`` on a function triggers a search for a matching subclass
|
|
|
|
of GCStrategy. Some collector strategies are built in. You can add others
|
|
|
|
using either the loadable plugin mechanism, or by patching your copy of LLVM.
|
|
|
|
It is the selected GC strategy which defines the exact nature of the code
|
|
|
|
generated to support GC. If none is found, the compiler will raise an error.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specifying the GC style on a per-function basis allows LLVM to link together
|
|
|
|
programs that use different garbage collection algorithms (or none at all).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _gcroot:
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-25 00:18:04 +00:00
|
|
|
Identifying GC roots on the stack
|
|
|
|
----------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LLVM currently supports two different mechanisms for describing references in
|
|
|
|
compiled code at safepoints. ``llvm.gcroot`` is the older mechanism;
|
|
|
|
``gc.statepoint`` has been added more recently. At the moment, you can choose
|
|
|
|
either implementation (on a per :ref:`GC strategy <plugin>` basis). Longer
|
|
|
|
term, we will probably either migrate away from ``llvm.gcroot`` entirely, or
|
|
|
|
substantially merge their implementations. Note that most new development
|
|
|
|
work is focused on ``gc.statepoint``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Using ``gc.statepoint``
|
|
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
:doc:`This page <Statepoints>` contains detailed documentation for
|
|
|
|
``gc.statepoint``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Using ``llvm.gcwrite``
|
|
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: llvm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %ptrloc, i8* %metadata)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ``llvm.gcroot`` intrinsic is used to inform LLVM that a stack variable
|
|
|
|
references an object on the heap and is to be tracked for garbage collection.
|
2015-02-25 23:07:34 +00:00
|
|
|
The exact impact on generated code is specified by the Function's selected
|
|
|
|
:ref:`GC strategy <plugin>`. All calls to ``llvm.gcroot`` **must** reside
|
|
|
|
inside the first basic block.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-25 00:18:04 +00:00
|
|
|
The first argument **must** be a value referring to an alloca instruction or a
|
|
|
|
bitcast of an alloca. The second contains a pointer to metadata that should be
|
|
|
|
associated with the pointer, and **must** be a constant or global value
|
|
|
|
address. If your target collector uses tags, use a null pointer for metadata.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A compiler which performs manual SSA construction **must** ensure that SSA
|
|
|
|
values representing GC references are stored in to the alloca passed to the
|
|
|
|
respective ``gcroot`` before every call site and reloaded after every call.
|
|
|
|
A compiler which uses mem2reg to raise imperative code using ``alloca`` into
|
|
|
|
SSA form need only add a call to ``@llvm.gcroot`` for those variables which
|
|
|
|
are pointers into the GC heap.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is also important to mark intermediate values with ``llvm.gcroot``. For
|
|
|
|
example, consider ``h(f(), g())``. Beware leaking the result of ``f()`` in the
|
|
|
|
case that ``g()`` triggers a collection. Note, that stack variables must be
|
|
|
|
initialized and marked with ``llvm.gcroot`` in function's prologue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The ``%metadata`` argument can be used to avoid requiring heap objects to have
|
|
|
|
'isa' pointers or tag bits. [Appel89_, Goldberg91_, Tolmach94_] If specified,
|
|
|
|
its value will be tracked along with the location of the pointer in the stack
|
|
|
|
frame.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consider the following fragment of Java code:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: java
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
Object X; // A null-initialized reference to an object
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This block (which may be located in the middle of a function or in a loop nest),
|
|
|
|
could be compiled to this LLVM code:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: llvm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Entry:
|
|
|
|
;; In the entry block for the function, allocate the
|
|
|
|
;; stack space for X, which is an LLVM pointer.
|
|
|
|
%X = alloca %Object*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
;; Tell LLVM that the stack space is a stack root.
|
|
|
|
;; Java has type-tags on objects, so we pass null as metadata.
|
|
|
|
%tmp = bitcast %Object** %X to i8**
|
|
|
|
call void @llvm.gcroot(i8** %tmp, i8* null)
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
;; "CodeBlock" is the block corresponding to the start
|
|
|
|
;; of the scope above.
|
|
|
|
CodeBlock:
|
|
|
|
;; Java null-initializes pointers.
|
|
|
|
store %Object* null, %Object** %X
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
;; As the pointer goes out of scope, store a null value into
|
|
|
|
;; it, to indicate that the value is no longer live.
|
|
|
|
store %Object* null, %Object** %X
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reading and writing references in the heap
|
|
|
|
------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Some collectors need to be informed when the mutator (the program that needs
|
|
|
|
garbage collection) either reads a pointer from or writes a pointer to a field
|
|
|
|
of a heap object. The code fragments inserted at these points are called *read
|
|
|
|
barriers* and *write barriers*, respectively. The amount of code that needs to
|
|
|
|
be executed is usually quite small and not on the critical path of any
|
|
|
|
computation, so the overall performance impact of the barrier is tolerable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Barriers often require access to the *object pointer* rather than the *derived
|
|
|
|
pointer* (which is a pointer to the field within the object). Accordingly,
|
|
|
|
these intrinsics take both pointers as separate arguments for completeness. In
|
|
|
|
this snippet, ``%object`` is the object pointer, and ``%derived`` is the derived
|
|
|
|
pointer:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: llvm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
;; An array type.
|
|
|
|
%class.Array = type { %class.Object, i32, [0 x %class.Object*] }
|
|
|
|
...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
;; Load the object pointer from a gcroot.
|
|
|
|
%object = load %class.Array** %object_addr
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
;; Compute the derived pointer.
|
|
|
|
%derived = getelementptr %object, i32 0, i32 2, i32 %n
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LLVM does not enforce this relationship between the object and derived pointer
|
2015-02-24 23:51:37 +00:00
|
|
|
(although a particular :ref:`collector strategy <plugin>` might). However, it
|
|
|
|
would be an unusual collector that violated it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The use of these intrinsics is naturally optional if the target GC does not
|
|
|
|
require the corresponding barrier. The GC strategy used with such a collector
|
|
|
|
should replace the intrinsic calls with the corresponding ``load`` or
|
|
|
|
``store`` instruction if they are used.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:51:37 +00:00
|
|
|
One known deficiency with the current design is that the barrier intrinsics do
|
|
|
|
not include the size or alignment of the underlying operation performed. It is
|
|
|
|
currently assumed that the operation is of pointer size and the alignment is
|
|
|
|
assumed to be the target machine's default alignment.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Write barrier: ``llvm.gcwrite``
|
|
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: llvm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
void @llvm.gcwrite(i8* %value, i8* %object, i8** %derived)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For write barriers, LLVM provides the ``llvm.gcwrite`` intrinsic function. It
|
|
|
|
has exactly the same semantics as a non-volatile ``store`` to the derived
|
2015-02-24 23:51:37 +00:00
|
|
|
pointer (the third argument). The exact code generated is specified by the
|
|
|
|
Function's selected :ref:`GC strategy <plugin>`.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Many important algorithms require write barriers, including generational and
|
|
|
|
concurrent collectors. Additionally, write barriers could be used to implement
|
|
|
|
reference counting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Read barrier: ``llvm.gcread``
|
|
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: llvm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i8* @llvm.gcread(i8* %object, i8** %derived)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For read barriers, LLVM provides the ``llvm.gcread`` intrinsic function. It has
|
|
|
|
exactly the same semantics as a non-volatile ``load`` from the derived pointer
|
2015-02-24 23:51:37 +00:00
|
|
|
(the second argument). The exact code generated is specified by the Function's
|
|
|
|
selected :ref:`GC strategy <plugin>`.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Read barriers are needed by fewer algorithms than write barriers, and may have a
|
|
|
|
greater performance impact since pointer reads are more frequent than writes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _plugin:
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-25 23:45:20 +00:00
|
|
|
.. _builtin-gc-strategies:
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-25 23:22:43 +00:00
|
|
|
Built In GC Strategies
|
|
|
|
======================
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LLVM includes built in support for several varieties of garbage collectors.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Shadow Stack GC
|
|
|
|
----------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To use this collector strategy, mark your functions with:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F.setGC("shadow-stack");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unlike many GC algorithms which rely on a cooperative code generator to compile
|
|
|
|
stack maps, this algorithm carefully maintains a linked list of stack roots
|
|
|
|
[:ref:`Henderson2002 <henderson02>`]. This so-called "shadow stack" mirrors the
|
|
|
|
machine stack. Maintaining this data structure is slower than using a stack map
|
|
|
|
compiled into the executable as constant data, but has a significant portability
|
|
|
|
advantage because it requires no special support from the target code generator,
|
|
|
|
and does not require tricky platform-specific code to crawl the machine stack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The tradeoff for this simplicity and portability is:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* High overhead per function call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Not thread-safe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Still, it's an easy way to get started. After your compiler and runtime are up
|
|
|
|
and running, writing a :ref:`plugin <plugin>` will allow you to take advantage
|
|
|
|
of :ref:`more advanced GC features <collector-algos>` of LLVM in order to
|
|
|
|
improve performance.
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The shadow stack doesn't imply a memory allocation algorithm. A semispace
|
|
|
|
collector or building atop ``malloc`` are great places to start, and can be
|
|
|
|
implemented with very little code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When it comes time to collect, however, your runtime needs to traverse the stack
|
|
|
|
roots, and for this it needs to integrate with the shadow stack. Luckily, doing
|
|
|
|
so is very simple. (This code is heavily commented to help you understand the
|
|
|
|
data structure, but there are only 20 lines of meaningful code.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/// @brief The map for a single function's stack frame. One of these is
|
|
|
|
/// compiled as constant data into the executable for each function.
|
|
|
|
///
|
|
|
|
/// Storage of metadata values is elided if the %metadata parameter to
|
|
|
|
/// @llvm.gcroot is null.
|
|
|
|
struct FrameMap {
|
|
|
|
int32_t NumRoots; //< Number of roots in stack frame.
|
|
|
|
int32_t NumMeta; //< Number of metadata entries. May be < NumRoots.
|
|
|
|
const void *Meta[0]; //< Metadata for each root.
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/// @brief A link in the dynamic shadow stack. One of these is embedded in
|
|
|
|
/// the stack frame of each function on the call stack.
|
|
|
|
struct StackEntry {
|
|
|
|
StackEntry *Next; //< Link to next stack entry (the caller's).
|
|
|
|
const FrameMap *Map; //< Pointer to constant FrameMap.
|
|
|
|
void *Roots[0]; //< Stack roots (in-place array).
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/// @brief The head of the singly-linked list of StackEntries. Functions push
|
|
|
|
/// and pop onto this in their prologue and epilogue.
|
|
|
|
///
|
|
|
|
/// Since there is only a global list, this technique is not threadsafe.
|
|
|
|
StackEntry *llvm_gc_root_chain;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/// @brief Calls Visitor(root, meta) for each GC root on the stack.
|
|
|
|
/// root and meta are exactly the values passed to
|
|
|
|
/// @llvm.gcroot.
|
|
|
|
///
|
|
|
|
/// Visitor could be a function to recursively mark live objects. Or it
|
|
|
|
/// might copy them to another heap or generation.
|
|
|
|
///
|
|
|
|
/// @param Visitor A function to invoke for every GC root on the stack.
|
|
|
|
void visitGCRoots(void (*Visitor)(void **Root, const void *Meta)) {
|
|
|
|
for (StackEntry *R = llvm_gc_root_chain; R; R = R->Next) {
|
|
|
|
unsigned i = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// For roots [0, NumMeta), the metadata pointer is in the FrameMap.
|
|
|
|
for (unsigned e = R->Map->NumMeta; i != e; ++i)
|
|
|
|
Visitor(&R->Roots[i], R->Map->Meta[i]);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// For roots [NumMeta, NumRoots), the metadata pointer is null.
|
|
|
|
for (unsigned e = R->Map->NumRoots; i != e; ++i)
|
|
|
|
Visitor(&R->Roots[i], NULL);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
The 'Erlang' and 'Ocaml' GCs
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-25 00:22:07 +00:00
|
|
|
LLVM ships with two example collectors which leverage the ``gcroot``
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
mechanisms. To our knowledge, these are not actually used by any language
|
|
|
|
runtime, but they do provide a reasonable starting point for someone interested
|
2015-02-25 00:22:07 +00:00
|
|
|
in writing an ``gcroot`` compatible GC plugin. In particular, these are the
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
only in tree examples of how to produce a custom binary stack map format using
|
2015-02-25 00:22:07 +00:00
|
|
|
a ``gcroot`` strategy.
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As there names imply, the binary format produced is intended to model that
|
|
|
|
used by the Erlang and OCaml compilers respectively.
|
|
|
|
|
2015-05-21 00:50:10 +00:00
|
|
|
.. _statepoint_example_gc:
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Statepoint Example GC
|
|
|
|
-------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F.setGC("statepoint-example");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This GC provides an example of how one might use the infrastructure provided
|
2015-02-25 23:22:43 +00:00
|
|
|
by ``gc.statepoint``. This example GC is compatible with the
|
|
|
|
:ref:`PlaceSafepoints` and :ref:`RewriteStatepointsForGC` utility passes
|
|
|
|
which simplify ``gc.statepoint`` sequence insertion. If you need to build a
|
|
|
|
custom GC strategy around the ``gc.statepoints`` mechanisms, it is recommended
|
|
|
|
that you use this one as a starting point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This GC strategy does not support read or write barriers. As a result, these
|
|
|
|
intrinsics are lowered to normal loads and stores.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The stack map format generated by this GC strategy can be found in the
|
|
|
|
:ref:`stackmap-section` using a format documented :ref:`here
|
|
|
|
<statepoint-stackmap-format>`. This format is intended to be the standard
|
|
|
|
format supported by LLVM going forward.
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-05-21 00:50:10 +00:00
|
|
|
The CoreCLR GC
|
|
|
|
-------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F.setGC("coreclr");
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This GC leverages the ``gc.statepoint`` mechanism to support the
|
|
|
|
`CoreCLR <https://github.com/dotnet/coreclr>`__ runtime.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Support for this GC strategy is a work in progress. This strategy will
|
|
|
|
differ from
|
|
|
|
:ref:`statepoint-example GC<statepoint_example_gc>` strategy in
|
|
|
|
certain aspects like:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Base-pointers of interior pointers are not explicitly
|
|
|
|
tracked and reported.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* A different format is used for encoding stack maps.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Safe-point polls are only needed before loop-back edges
|
|
|
|
and before tail-calls (not needed at function-entry).
|
2015-02-24 19:44:46 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
Custom GC Strategies
|
|
|
|
====================
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If none of the built in GC strategy descriptions met your needs above, you will
|
|
|
|
need to define a custom GCStrategy and possibly, a custom LLVM pass to perform
|
|
|
|
lowering. Your best example of where to start defining a custom GCStrategy
|
|
|
|
would be to look at one of the built in strategies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You may be able to structure this additional code as a loadable plugin library.
|
|
|
|
Loadable plugins are sufficient if all you need is to enable a different
|
|
|
|
combination of built in functionality, but if you need to provide a custom
|
|
|
|
lowering pass, you will need to build a patched version of LLVM. If you think
|
|
|
|
you need a patched build, please ask for advice on llvm-dev. There may be an
|
|
|
|
easy way we can extend the support to make it work for your use case without
|
|
|
|
requiring a custom build.
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:34:24 +00:00
|
|
|
Collector Requirements
|
|
|
|
----------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You should be able to leverage any existing collector library that includes the following elements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. A memory allocator which exposes an allocation function your compiled
|
|
|
|
code can call.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. A binary format for the stack map. A stack map describes the location
|
|
|
|
of references at a safepoint and is used by precise collectors to identify
|
|
|
|
references within a stack frame on the machine stack. Note that collectors
|
|
|
|
which conservatively scan the stack don't require such a structure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. A stack crawler to discover functions on the call stack, and enumerate the
|
|
|
|
references listed in the stack map for each call site.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. A mechanism for identifying references in global locations (e.g. global
|
|
|
|
variables).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#. If you collector requires them, an LLVM IR implementation of your collectors
|
|
|
|
load and store barriers. Note that since many collectors don't require
|
|
|
|
barriers at all, LLVM defaults to lowering such barriers to normal loads
|
|
|
|
and stores unless you arrange otherwise.
|
|
|
|
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
Implementing a collector plugin
|
2015-02-24 23:12:27 +00:00
|
|
|
-------------------------------
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
User code specifies which GC code generation to use with the ``gc`` function
|
|
|
|
attribute or, equivalently, with the ``setGC`` method of ``Function``.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To implement a GC plugin, it is necessary to subclass ``llvm::GCStrategy``,
|
|
|
|
which can be accomplished in a few lines of boilerplate code. LLVM's
|
|
|
|
infrastructure provides access to several important algorithms. For an
|
|
|
|
uncontroversial collector, all that remains may be to compile LLVM's computed
|
|
|
|
stack map to assembly code (using the binary representation expected by the
|
|
|
|
runtime library). This can be accomplished in about 100 lines of code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is not the appropriate place to implement a garbage collected heap or a
|
|
|
|
garbage collector itself. That code should exist in the language's runtime
|
|
|
|
library. The compiler plugin is responsible for generating code which conforms
|
|
|
|
to the binary interface defined by library, most essentially the :ref:`stack map
|
|
|
|
<stack-map>`.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To subclass ``llvm::GCStrategy`` and register it with the compiler:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// lib/MyGC/MyGC.cpp - Example LLVM GC plugin
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "llvm/CodeGen/GCStrategy.h"
|
|
|
|
#include "llvm/CodeGen/GCMetadata.h"
|
|
|
|
#include "llvm/Support/Compiler.h"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
using namespace llvm;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
namespace {
|
|
|
|
class LLVM_LIBRARY_VISIBILITY MyGC : public GCStrategy {
|
|
|
|
public:
|
|
|
|
MyGC() {}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GCRegistry::Add<MyGC>
|
|
|
|
X("mygc", "My bespoke garbage collector.");
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This boilerplate collector does nothing. More specifically:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* ``llvm.gcread`` calls are replaced with the corresponding ``load``
|
|
|
|
instruction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* ``llvm.gcwrite`` calls are replaced with the corresponding ``store``
|
|
|
|
instruction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* No safe points are added to the code.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* The stack map is not compiled into the executable.
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-12 22:40:22 +00:00
|
|
|
Using the LLVM makefiles, this code
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
can be compiled as a plugin using a simple makefile:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: make
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
# lib/MyGC/Makefile
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LEVEL := ../..
|
|
|
|
LIBRARYNAME = MyGC
|
|
|
|
LOADABLE_MODULE = 1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
include $(LEVEL)/Makefile.common
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Once the plugin is compiled, code using it may be compiled using ``llc
|
|
|
|
-load=MyGC.so`` (though MyGC.so may have some other platform-specific
|
|
|
|
extension):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
::
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ cat sample.ll
|
|
|
|
define void @f() gc "mygc" {
|
|
|
|
entry:
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
ret void
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
$ llvm-as < sample.ll | llc -load=MyGC.so
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is also possible to statically link the collector plugin into tools, such as
|
|
|
|
a language-specific compiler front-end.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _collector-algos:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Overview of available features
|
|
|
|
------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
``GCStrategy`` provides a range of features through which a plugin may do useful
|
|
|
|
work. Some of these are callbacks, some are algorithms that can be enabled,
|
|
|
|
disabled, or customized. This matrix summarizes the supported (and planned)
|
|
|
|
features and correlates them with the collection techniques which typically
|
|
|
|
require them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. |v| unicode:: 0x2714
|
|
|
|
:trim:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. |x| unicode:: 0x2718
|
|
|
|
:trim:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| Algorithm | Done | Shadow | refcount | mark- | copying | incremental | threaded | concurrent |
|
|
|
|
| | | stack | | sweep | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+============+======+========+==========+=======+=========+=============+==========+============+
|
|
|
|
| stack map | |v| | | | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| initialize | |v| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| |
|
|
|
|
| roots | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| derived | NO | | | | | | **N**\* | **N**\* |
|
|
|
|
| pointers | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| **custom | |v| | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
| lowering** | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *gcroot* | |v| | |x| | |x| | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *gcwrite* | |v| | | |x| | | | |x| | | |x| |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *gcread* | |v| | | | | | | | |x| |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| **safe | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
| points** | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *in | |v| | | | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| |
|
|
|
|
| calls* | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *before | |v| | | | | | | |x| | |x| |
|
|
|
|
| calls* | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *for | NO | | | | | | **N** | **N** |
|
|
|
|
| loops* | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *before | |v| | | | | | | |x| | |x| |
|
|
|
|
| escape* | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| emit code | NO | | | | | | **N** | **N** |
|
|
|
|
| at safe | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
| points | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| **output** | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *assembly* | |v| | | | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| | |x| |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *JIT* | NO | | | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| *obj* | NO | | | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| live | NO | | | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** |
|
|
|
|
| analysis | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| register | NO | | | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** | **?** |
|
|
|
|
| map | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| \* Derived pointers only pose a hasard to copying collections. |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
| **?** denotes a feature which could be utilized if available. |
|
|
|
|
+------------+------+--------+----------+-------+---------+-------------+----------+------------+
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To be clear, the collection techniques above are defined as:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shadow Stack
|
|
|
|
The mutator carefully maintains a linked list of stack roots.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reference Counting
|
|
|
|
The mutator maintains a reference count for each object and frees an object
|
|
|
|
when its count falls to zero.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark-Sweep
|
|
|
|
When the heap is exhausted, the collector marks reachable objects starting
|
|
|
|
from the roots, then deallocates unreachable objects in a sweep phase.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Copying
|
|
|
|
As reachability analysis proceeds, the collector copies objects from one heap
|
|
|
|
area to another, compacting them in the process. Copying collectors enable
|
|
|
|
highly efficient "bump pointer" allocation and can improve locality of
|
|
|
|
reference.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Incremental
|
|
|
|
(Including generational collectors.) Incremental collectors generally have all
|
|
|
|
the properties of a copying collector (regardless of whether the mature heap
|
|
|
|
is compacting), but bring the added complexity of requiring write barriers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Threaded
|
|
|
|
Denotes a multithreaded mutator; the collector must still stop the mutator
|
|
|
|
("stop the world") before beginning reachability analysis. Stopping a
|
|
|
|
multithreaded mutator is a complicated problem. It generally requires highly
|
2014-06-30 18:57:16 +00:00
|
|
|
platform-specific code in the runtime, and the production of carefully
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
designed machine code at safe points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Concurrent
|
|
|
|
In this technique, the mutator and the collector run concurrently, with the
|
|
|
|
goal of eliminating pause times. In a *cooperative* collector, the mutator
|
|
|
|
further aids with collection should a pause occur, allowing collection to take
|
|
|
|
advantage of multiprocessor hosts. The "stop the world" problem of threaded
|
|
|
|
collectors is generally still present to a limited extent. Sophisticated
|
|
|
|
marking algorithms are necessary. Read barriers may be necessary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As the matrix indicates, LLVM's garbage collection infrastructure is already
|
|
|
|
suitable for a wide variety of collectors, but does not currently extend to
|
|
|
|
multithreaded programs. This will be added in the future as there is
|
|
|
|
interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _stack-map:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Computing stack maps
|
|
|
|
--------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LLVM automatically computes a stack map. One of the most important features
|
|
|
|
of a ``GCStrategy`` is to compile this information into the executable in
|
|
|
|
the binary representation expected by the runtime library.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The stack map consists of the location and identity of each GC root in the
|
|
|
|
each function in the module. For each root:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* ``RootNum``: The index of the root.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* ``StackOffset``: The offset of the object relative to the frame pointer.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* ``RootMetadata``: The value passed as the ``%metadata`` parameter to the
|
|
|
|
``@llvm.gcroot`` intrinsic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Also, for the function as a whole:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* ``getFrameSize()``: The overall size of the function's initial stack frame,
|
|
|
|
not accounting for any dynamic allocation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* ``roots_size()``: The count of roots in the function.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To access the stack map, use ``GCFunctionMetadata::roots_begin()`` and
|
|
|
|
-``end()`` from the :ref:`GCMetadataPrinter <assembly>`:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (iterator I = begin(), E = end(); I != E; ++I) {
|
|
|
|
GCFunctionInfo *FI = *I;
|
|
|
|
unsigned FrameSize = FI->getFrameSize();
|
|
|
|
size_t RootCount = FI->roots_size();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (GCFunctionInfo::roots_iterator RI = FI->roots_begin(),
|
|
|
|
RE = FI->roots_end();
|
|
|
|
RI != RE; ++RI) {
|
|
|
|
int RootNum = RI->Num;
|
|
|
|
int RootStackOffset = RI->StackOffset;
|
|
|
|
Constant *RootMetadata = RI->Metadata;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If the ``llvm.gcroot`` intrinsic is eliminated before code generation by a
|
|
|
|
custom lowering pass, LLVM will compute an empty stack map. This may be useful
|
|
|
|
for collector plugins which implement reference counting or a shadow stack.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _init-roots:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initializing roots to null: ``InitRoots``
|
|
|
|
-----------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MyGC::MyGC() {
|
|
|
|
InitRoots = true;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
When set, LLVM will automatically initialize each root to ``null`` upon entry to
|
|
|
|
the function. This prevents the GC's sweep phase from visiting uninitialized
|
|
|
|
pointers, which will almost certainly cause it to crash. This initialization
|
|
|
|
occurs before custom lowering, so the two may be used together.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since LLVM does not yet compute liveness information, there is no means of
|
|
|
|
distinguishing an uninitialized stack root from an initialized one. Therefore,
|
|
|
|
this feature should be used by all GC plugins. It is enabled by default.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Custom lowering of intrinsics: ``CustomRoots``, ``CustomReadBarriers``, and ``CustomWriteBarriers``
|
|
|
|
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
2015-01-28 19:28:03 +00:00
|
|
|
For GCs which use barriers or unusual treatment of stack roots, these
|
|
|
|
flags allow the collector to perform arbitrary transformations of the
|
|
|
|
LLVM IR:
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
class MyGC : public GCStrategy {
|
|
|
|
public:
|
|
|
|
MyGC() {
|
|
|
|
CustomRoots = true;
|
|
|
|
CustomReadBarriers = true;
|
|
|
|
CustomWriteBarriers = true;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
2015-01-28 19:28:03 +00:00
|
|
|
If any of these flags are set, LLVM suppresses its default lowering for
|
|
|
|
the corresponding intrinsics. Instead, you must provide a custom Pass
|
|
|
|
which lowers the intrinsics as desired. If you have opted in to custom
|
|
|
|
lowering of a particular intrinsic your pass **must** eliminate all
|
|
|
|
instances of the corresponding intrinsic in functions which opt in to
|
|
|
|
your GC. The best example of such a pass is the ShadowStackGC and it's
|
|
|
|
ShadowStackGCLowering pass.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-01-28 19:28:03 +00:00
|
|
|
There is currently no way to register such a custom lowering pass
|
|
|
|
without building a custom copy of LLVM.
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _safe-points:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Generating safe points: ``NeededSafePoints``
|
|
|
|
--------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LLVM can compute four kinds of safe points:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
namespace GC {
|
|
|
|
/// PointKind - The type of a collector-safe point.
|
|
|
|
///
|
|
|
|
enum PointKind {
|
|
|
|
Loop, //< Instr is a loop (backwards branch).
|
|
|
|
Return, //< Instr is a return instruction.
|
|
|
|
PreCall, //< Instr is a call instruction.
|
|
|
|
PostCall //< Instr is the return address of a call.
|
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A collector can request any combination of the four by setting the
|
|
|
|
``NeededSafePoints`` mask:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MyGC::MyGC() {
|
|
|
|
NeededSafePoints = 1 << GC::Loop
|
|
|
|
| 1 << GC::Return
|
|
|
|
| 1 << GC::PreCall
|
|
|
|
| 1 << GC::PostCall;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It can then use the following routines to access safe points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (iterator I = begin(), E = end(); I != E; ++I) {
|
|
|
|
GCFunctionInfo *MD = *I;
|
|
|
|
size_t PointCount = MD->size();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for (GCFunctionInfo::iterator PI = MD->begin(),
|
|
|
|
PE = MD->end(); PI != PE; ++PI) {
|
|
|
|
GC::PointKind PointKind = PI->Kind;
|
|
|
|
unsigned PointNum = PI->Num;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Almost every collector requires ``PostCall`` safe points, since these correspond
|
|
|
|
to the moments when the function is suspended during a call to a subroutine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Threaded programs generally require ``Loop`` safe points to guarantee that the
|
|
|
|
application will reach a safe point within a bounded amount of time, even if it
|
|
|
|
is executing a long-running loop which contains no function calls.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Threaded collectors may also require ``Return`` and ``PreCall`` safe points to
|
|
|
|
implement "stop the world" techniques using self-modifying code, where it is
|
|
|
|
important that the program not exit the function without reaching a safe point
|
|
|
|
(because only the topmost function has been patched).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _assembly:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Emitting assembly code: ``GCMetadataPrinter``
|
|
|
|
---------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LLVM allows a plugin to print arbitrary assembly code before and after the rest
|
|
|
|
of a module's assembly code. At the end of the module, the GC can compile the
|
|
|
|
LLVM stack map into assembly code. (At the beginning, this information is not
|
|
|
|
yet computed.)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since AsmWriter and CodeGen are separate components of LLVM, a separate abstract
|
|
|
|
base class and registry is provided for printing assembly code, the
|
|
|
|
``GCMetadaPrinter`` and ``GCMetadataPrinterRegistry``. The AsmWriter will look
|
|
|
|
for such a subclass if the ``GCStrategy`` sets ``UsesMetadata``:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MyGC::MyGC() {
|
|
|
|
UsesMetadata = true;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This separation allows JIT-only clients to be smaller.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note that LLVM does not currently have analogous APIs to support code generation
|
|
|
|
in the JIT, nor using the object writers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// lib/MyGC/MyGCPrinter.cpp - Example LLVM GC printer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "llvm/CodeGen/GCMetadataPrinter.h"
|
|
|
|
#include "llvm/Support/Compiler.h"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
using namespace llvm;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
namespace {
|
|
|
|
class LLVM_LIBRARY_VISIBILITY MyGCPrinter : public GCMetadataPrinter {
|
|
|
|
public:
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
virtual void beginAssembly(AsmPrinter &AP);
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
virtual void finishAssembly(AsmPrinter &AP);
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
};
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GCMetadataPrinterRegistry::Add<MyGCPrinter>
|
|
|
|
X("mygc", "My bespoke garbage collector.");
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2013-10-18 23:11:25 +00:00
|
|
|
The collector should use ``AsmPrinter`` to print portable assembly code. The
|
|
|
|
collector itself contains the stack map for the entire module, and may access
|
|
|
|
the ``GCFunctionInfo`` using its own ``begin()`` and ``end()`` methods. Here's
|
|
|
|
a realistic example:
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#include "llvm/CodeGen/AsmPrinter.h"
|
2013-07-08 19:59:35 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "llvm/IR/Function.h"
|
|
|
|
#include "llvm/IR/DataLayout.h"
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "llvm/Target/TargetAsmInfo.h"
|
2013-07-08 19:59:35 +00:00
|
|
|
#include "llvm/Target/TargetMachine.h"
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
void MyGCPrinter::beginAssembly(AsmPrinter &AP) {
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
// Nothing to do.
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
void MyGCPrinter::finishAssembly(AsmPrinter &AP) {
|
|
|
|
MCStreamer &OS = AP.OutStreamer;
|
2014-08-04 21:25:23 +00:00
|
|
|
unsigned IntPtrSize = AP.TM.getSubtargetImpl()->getDataLayout()->getPointerSize();
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Put this in the data section.
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
OS.SwitchSection(AP.getObjFileLowering().getDataSection());
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// For each function...
|
|
|
|
for (iterator FI = begin(), FE = end(); FI != FE; ++FI) {
|
|
|
|
GCFunctionInfo &MD = **FI;
|
|
|
|
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
// A compact GC layout. Emit this data structure:
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
//
|
|
|
|
// struct {
|
|
|
|
// int32_t PointCount;
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
// void *SafePointAddress[PointCount];
|
|
|
|
// int32_t StackFrameSize; // in words
|
|
|
|
// int32_t StackArity;
|
|
|
|
// int32_t LiveCount;
|
|
|
|
// int32_t LiveOffsets[LiveCount];
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
// } __gcmap_<FUNCTIONNAME>;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Align to address width.
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
AP.EmitAlignment(IntPtrSize == 4 ? 2 : 3);
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Emit PointCount.
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
OS.AddComment("safe point count");
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
AP.EmitInt32(MD.size());
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// And each safe point...
|
|
|
|
for (GCFunctionInfo::iterator PI = MD.begin(),
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
PE = MD.end(); PI != PE; ++PI) {
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
// Emit the address of the safe point.
|
2013-10-18 23:09:06 +00:00
|
|
|
OS.AddComment("safe point address");
|
|
|
|
MCSymbol *Label = PI->Label;
|
|
|
|
AP.EmitLabelPlusOffset(Label/*Hi*/, 0/*Offset*/, 4/*Size*/);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Stack information never change in safe points! Only print info from the
|
|
|
|
// first call-site.
|
|
|
|
GCFunctionInfo::iterator PI = MD.begin();
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Emit the stack frame size.
|
|
|
|
OS.AddComment("stack frame size (in words)");
|
|
|
|
AP.EmitInt32(MD.getFrameSize() / IntPtrSize);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Emit stack arity, i.e. the number of stacked arguments.
|
|
|
|
unsigned RegisteredArgs = IntPtrSize == 4 ? 5 : 6;
|
|
|
|
unsigned StackArity = MD.getFunction().arg_size() > RegisteredArgs ?
|
|
|
|
MD.getFunction().arg_size() - RegisteredArgs : 0;
|
|
|
|
OS.AddComment("stack arity");
|
|
|
|
AP.EmitInt32(StackArity);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// Emit the number of live roots in the function.
|
|
|
|
OS.AddComment("live root count");
|
|
|
|
AP.EmitInt32(MD.live_size(PI));
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
// And for each live root...
|
|
|
|
for (GCFunctionInfo::live_iterator LI = MD.live_begin(PI),
|
|
|
|
LE = MD.live_end(PI);
|
|
|
|
LI != LE; ++LI) {
|
|
|
|
// Emit live root's offset within the stack frame.
|
|
|
|
OS.AddComment("stack index (offset / wordsize)");
|
|
|
|
AP.EmitInt32(LI->StackOffset);
|
2012-12-09 15:52:47 +00:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
References
|
|
|
|
==========
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _appel89:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Appel89] Runtime Tags Aren't Necessary. Andrew W. Appel. Lisp and Symbolic
|
|
|
|
Computation 19(7):703-705, July 1989.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _goldberg91:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Goldberg91] Tag-free garbage collection for strongly typed programming
|
|
|
|
languages. Benjamin Goldberg. ACM SIGPLAN PLDI'91.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _tolmach94:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Tolmach94] Tag-free garbage collection using explicit type parameters. Andrew
|
|
|
|
Tolmach. Proceedings of the 1994 ACM conference on LISP and functional
|
|
|
|
programming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. _henderson02:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[Henderson2002] `Accurate Garbage Collection in an Uncooperative Environment
|
|
|
|
<http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/henderson02accurate.html>`__
|