Challenge of the day: what will the following code display?
struct Point
{
public int X;
public int Y;
}
static void Print(Point p)
{
Console.WriteLine(p.X + " " + p.Y);
}
static void Main()
{
var p = new Point();
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
Print(p);
}
The right answer: it depends. There is a bug in CLR2 JIT-x86 which spoil this wonderful program. This story is about optimization that called unrolling of small loops. This is a very interesting theme, let’s discuss it in detail.
Experiment 1 (Sum)
In the previous post, I told how loop unrolling works. There is a special case of this optimization: unrolling of small loops: if you have small amount of iterations, JIT can completely eliminate the loop by repeating its body several times. Let’s discuss it with the following simple code:
int sum = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++)
sum += i;
Console.WriteLine(sum);
JIT-x86
Let’s run the code with CLR4 + JIT-x86:
int sum = 0;
0125291A in al,dx
0125291B push esi
0125291C xor esi,esi
sum += i;
0125291E inc esi ; sum += 1
0125291F inc esi ; sum += 2 (Part 1)
01252920 inc esi ; sum += 2 (Part 2)
01252921 add esi,3 ; sum += 3
Console.WriteLine(sum);
01252924 call 72EE0258
01252929 mov ecx,eax
0125292B mov edx,esi
0125292D mov eax,dword ptr [ecx]
0125292F mov eax,dword ptr [eax+38h]
01252932 call dword ptr [eax+14h]
01252935 pop esi
01252936 pop ebp
01252937 ret
As we can see, there are no branches in the program, the loop was completely eliminate. Instead of the loop, we have special instructions that calculate a value of the sum variable in the esi register.
JIT-x64
Next, CLR4 + JIT-x64:
int sum = 0;
00007FFCC86F3EC0 sub rsp,28h
Console.WriteLine(sum);
00007FFCC86F3EC4 mov ecx,6 ; sum = 6
00007FFCC86F3EC9 call 00007FFD273DCF10
00007FFCC86F3ECE nop
00007FFCC86F3ECF add rsp,28h
00007FFCC86F3ED3 ret
JIT-x64 have done wonderful job:: he guessed that 0+1+2+3=6. As a result, 6 displays without any arithmetic operations for its calculation.
RyuJIT CTP5
Next, CLR4 + RyuJIT CTP5:
int sum = 0;
00007FFCC8713A02 sub esp,20h
00007FFCC8713A05 xor esi,esi
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++)
00007FFCC8713A07 xor eax,eax
sum += i;
00007FFCC8713A09 add esi,eax
for (int i = 0; i < 4; i++)
00007FFCC8713A0B inc eax
00007FFCC8713A0D cmp eax,4
00007FFCC8713A10 jl 00007FFCC8713A09
Console.WriteLine(sum);
00007FFCC8713A12 call 00007FFD26C0AFA0
00007FFCC8713A17 mov rcx,rax
00007FFCC8713A1A mov edx,esi
00007FFCC8713A1C mov rax,qword ptr [rax]
00007FFCC8713A1F mov rax,qword ptr [rax+60h]
00007FFCC8713A23 call qword ptr [rax+28h]
00007FFCC8713A26 nop
00007FFCC8713A27 add rsp,20h
00007FFCC8713A2B pop rsi
00007FFCC8713A2C ret
Hey, RyuJIT, what is wrong with you? The optimization looks very simple, but you did not it! Well, we hope that you will learn it in the final release.
Experiment 2 (Point)
Now, let’s back to the first code snippet:
struct Point
{
public int X;
public int Y;
}
static void Print(Point p)
{
Console.WriteLine(p.X + " " + p.Y);
}
static void Main()
{
var p = new Point();
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
Print(p);
}
Logic suggests us that the following output will be display:
0 0
1 0
Let’s check it!
CLR2 + JIT-x86
Let’s start with the configuration in which there is a bug: CLR2 + JIT-x86. In this case, the following output will be display:
2 0
2 0
Open the assembler code:
var p = new Point();
05C5178C push esi
05C5178D xor esi,esi ; p.Y = 0
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
05C5178F lea edi,[esi+2] ; p.X = 2
Print(p);
05C51792 push esi ; push p.Y
05C51793 push edi ; push p.X
05C51794 call dword ptr ds:[54607F4h] ; Print(p)
05C5179A push esi ; push p.Y
05C5179B push edi ; push p.X
05C5179C call dword ptr ds:[54607F4h] ; Print(p)
05C517A2 pop esi
05C517A3 pop edi
05C517A4 pop ebp
05C517A5 ret
As we can see, loop unrolling have been performed, but the optimization has an error: variable x immediately takes the value 2 and never changing. This bug has long been known, it have been discussed in the question on StackOverflow [.NET JIT potential error?] (Http://stackoverflow.com/q/2056948/184842).
Let’s check other JIT versions.
CLR4 + JIT-x86
var p = new Point();
01392620 push ebp
01392621 mov ebp,esp
01392623 push edi
01392624 push esi
01392625 xor edi,edi ; p.Y = 0
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
01392627 xor esi,esi ; p.X = 0
Print(p);
01392629 push edi ; push p.Y
0139262A push esi ; push p.X
0139262B call dword ptr ds:[2DB2108h] ; Print(p)
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
01392631 inc esi ; p.X++
01392632 cmp esi,2
01392635 jl 01392629
01392637 pop esi
01392638 pop edi
01392639 pop ebp
0139263A ret
Microsoft has fixed the bug in CLR4. Unfortunately we don’t have loop unrolling in the new version of the code. It works correctly, though not so fast.
CLR2 + JIT-x64
var p = new Point();
00007FFCB94A3502 in al,dx
00007FFCB94A3503 cmp byte ptr [rbx],dh
00007FFCB94A3505 ror byte ptr [rax-77h],44h
00007FFCB94A3509 and al,20h
00007FFCB94A350B xor eax,eax
00007FFCB94A350D mov qword ptr [rsp+20h],rax
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
00007FFCB94A3512 mov dword ptr [rsp+20h],0
00007FFCB94A351A mov eax,dword ptr [rsp+20h]
00007FFCB94A351E cmp eax,2
00007FFCB94A3521 jge 00007FFCB94A3544
Print(p);
00007FFCB94A3523 mov rcx,qword ptr [rsp+20h]
00007FFCB94A3528 call 00007FFCB936C868
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
00007FFCB94A352D mov r11d,dword ptr [rsp+20h]
00007FFCB94A3532 add r11d,1
00007FFCB94A3536 mov dword ptr [rsp+20h],r11d
00007FFCB94A353B mov eax,dword ptr [rsp+20h]
00007FFCB94A353F cmp eax,2
00007FFCB94A3542 jl 00007FFCB94A3523
00007FFCB94A3544 add rsp,38h
00007FFCB94A3548 rep ret
Although this code works correctly, but it is very bad: loop unrolling haven’t been applying, and we have big amount of unnecessary instruction with sending values between stack and registers. Let’s see what has changed in CLR4.
CLR4 + JIT-x64
var p = new Point();
00007FFCC8703EC2 sub esp,30h
00007FFCC8703EC5 mov qword ptr [rsp+20h],0
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
00007FFCC8703ECE xor ebx,ebx
00007FFCC8703ED0 mov dword ptr [rsp+20h],ebx
00007FFCC8703ED4 cmp ebx,2
00007FFCC8703ED7 jge 00007FFCC8703EF5
00007FFCC8703ED9 nop dword ptr [rax]
Print(p);
00007FFCC8703EE0 mov rcx,qword ptr [rsp+20h]
00007FFCC8703EE5 call 00007FFCC85EC8E0
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
00007FFCC8703EEA inc ebx
00007FFCC8703EEC mov dword ptr [rsp+20h],ebx
00007FFCC8703EF0 cmp ebx,2
00007FFCC8703EF3 jl 00007FFCC8703EE0
00007FFCC8703EF5 add rsp,30h
00007FFCC8703EF9 pop rbx
00007FFCC8703EFA ret
We still don’t have loop unrolling. However, code has become much better in comparison with CLR2 + JIT-x64. Note, the sending the Point structure to the Print method implements via 64-bit register instead of two 32-bit values on the stack in JIT-x86.
CLR4 + RyuJIT CTP5
Next, let’s try RyuJIT CTP5:
var p = new Point();
00007FFCC8723A02 sub rsp,28h
00007FFCC8723A06 xor esi,esi
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
00007FFCC8723A08 xor edi,edi
Print(p);
00007FFCC8723A0A lea rcx,[rsp+20h]
00007FFCC8723A0F mov dword ptr [rcx],edi
00007FFCC8723A11 mov dword ptr [rcx+4],esi
00007FFCC8723A14 mov rcx,qword ptr [rsp+20h]
00007FFCC8723A19 call 00007FFCC860C8E0
for (p.X = 0; p.X < 2; p.X++)
00007FFCC8723A1E inc edi
00007FFCC8723A20 cmp edi,2
00007FFCC8723A23 jl 00007FFCC8723A0A
00007FFCC8723A25 add rsp,28h
00007FFCC8723A29 pop rsi
00007FFCC8723A2A pop rdi
00007FFCC8723A2B ret
We don’t have loop unrolling. However, code looks a little cleaner with comparison with CLR4 + JIT-x64.
Summary
We show the results of the experiments in the following table:
| Experiment | CLR | JIT | Results |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sum | 4 | x86 | Loop unrolling |
| Sum | 4 | x64 | Value precalculation |
| Sum | 4 | RuyJIT | Loop unrolling is absence |
| Point | 2 | x86 | Loop unrolling with the bug |
| Point | 4 | x86 | Loop unrolling is absence |
| Point | 2 | x64 | Loop unrolling is absence, poor code quality |
| Point | 4 | x64 | Loop unrolling is absence, medium code quality |
| Point | 4 | RyuJIT | Loop unrolling is absence, good code quality |