From: simonpj@microsoft.com Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 22:36:37 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Transfer INLINE to specialised functions X-Git-Url: http://git.megacz.com/?p=ghc-hetmet.git;a=commitdiff_plain;h=8d227e35da15330084dccbd67069d0804adccf4c Transfer INLINE to specialised functions When the Specialise pass generates a specialised copy of a function, it should transfer the INLINE information to the specialised function. Otherwise, whether or not the INLNE happens can depend on whether specialisation happens, which seems wrong. See Note [Inline specialisation] in Specialise.lhs Here's the example Roman reported primWriteMU :: UAE e => MUArr e s -> Int -> e -> ST s () {-# INLINE primWriteMU #-} primWriteMU = writeMBU . unMUAPrim ------ The problem is that primWriteMU doesn't get inlined *sometimes*, which results in code like case Data.Array.Parallel.Unlifted.Flat.UArr.$sprimWriteMU @ s11_X1nJ marr_s25s (GHC.Base.I# sc_s27F) GHC.Base.False new_s_a1Db of wild3_a1Dd { (# new_s1_X1F9, r_a1Dc #) -> ... Note the fact that we have a call to the *specialised* $sprimWriteMU. --- diff --git a/compiler/specialise/Specialise.lhs b/compiler/specialise/Specialise.lhs index 0e66b0b..3646f91 100644 --- a/compiler/specialise/Specialise.lhs +++ b/compiler/specialise/Specialise.lhs @@ -9,7 +9,8 @@ module Specialise ( specProgram ) where #include "HsVersions.h" import DynFlags ( DynFlags, DynFlag(..) ) -import Id ( Id, idName, idType, mkUserLocal ) +import Id ( Id, idName, idType, mkUserLocal, + idInlinePragma, setInlinePragma ) import TcType ( Type, mkTyVarTy, tcSplitSigmaTy, tyVarsOfTypes, tyVarsOfTheta, isClassPred, tcCmpType, isUnLiftedType @@ -785,13 +786,10 @@ specDefn subst calls (fn, rhs) && rhs_bndrs `lengthAtLeast` n_dicts -- and enough dict args && notNull calls_for_me -- And there are some calls to specialise --- At one time I tried not specialising small functions --- but sometimes there are big functions marked INLINE --- that we'd like to specialise. In particular, dictionary --- functions, which Marcin is keen to inline --- && not (certainlyWillInline fn) -- And it's not small - -- If it's small, it's better just to inline - -- it than to construct lots of specialisations +-- && not (certainlyWillInline (idUnfolding fn)) -- And it's not small +-- See Note [Inline specialisation] for why we do not +-- switch off specialisation for inline functions + = -- Specialise the body of the function specExpr subst rhs `thenSM` \ (rhs', rhs_uds) -> @@ -815,11 +813,12 @@ specDefn subst calls (fn, rhs) (tyvars, theta, _) = tcSplitSigmaTy fn_type n_tyvars = length tyvars n_dicts = length theta + inline_prag = idInlinePragma fn - (rhs_tyvars, rhs_ids, rhs_body) - = collectTyAndValBinders (dropInline rhs) -- It's important that we "see past" any INLINE pragma -- else we'll fail to specialise an INLINE thing + (inline_rhs, rhs_inside) = dropInline rhs + (rhs_tyvars, rhs_ids, rhs_body) = collectTyAndValBinders rhs_inside rhs_dicts = take n_dicts rhs_ids rhs_bndrs = rhs_tyvars ++ rhs_dicts @@ -891,25 +890,47 @@ specDefn subst calls (fn, rhs) -- Add the { d1' = dx1; d2' = dx2 } usage stuff final_uds = foldr addDictBind rhs_uds (my_zipEqual "spec_call" rhs_dicts' call_ds) - -- NOTE: we don't add back in any INLINE pragma on the RHS, so even if - -- the original function said INLINE, the specialised copies won't. - -- The idea is that the point of inlining was precisely to specialise - -- the function at its call site, and that's not so important for the - -- specialised copies. But it still smells like an ad hoc decision. - + spec_pr | inline_rhs = (spec_f `setInlinePragma` inline_prag, Note InlineMe spec_rhs) + | otherwise = (spec_f, spec_rhs) in - returnSM ((spec_f, spec_rhs), - final_uds, - spec_env_rule) + returnSM (spec_pr, final_uds, spec_env_rule) where my_zipEqual doc xs ys | not (equalLength xs ys) = pprPanic "my_zipEqual" (ppr xs $$ ppr ys $$ (ppr fn <+> ppr call_ts) $$ ppr rhs) | otherwise = zipEqual doc xs ys +\end{code} -dropInline :: CoreExpr -> CoreExpr -dropInline (Note InlineMe rhs) = rhs -dropInline rhs = rhs +Note [Inline specialisations] +~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ +We transfer to the specialised function any INLINE stuff from the +original. This means (a) the Activation in the IdInfo, and (b) any +InlineMe on the RHS. + +This is a change (Jun06). Previously the idea is that the point of +inlining was precisely to specialise the function at its call site, +and that's not so important for the specialised copies. But +*pragma-directed* specialisation now takes place in the +typechecker/desugarer, with manually specified INLINEs. The +specialiation here is automatic. It'd be very odd if a function +marked INLINE was specialised (because of some local use), and then +forever after (including importing modules) the specialised version +wasn't INLINEd. After all, the programmer said INLINE! + +You might wonder why we don't just not specialise INLINE functions. +It's because even INLINE functions are sometimes not inlined, when +they aren't applied to interesting arguments. But perhaps the type +arguments alone are enough to specialise (even though the args are too +boring to trigger inlining), and it's certainly better to call the +specialised version. + +A case in point is dictionary functions, which are current marked +INLINE, but which are worth specialising. + +\begin{code} +dropInline :: CoreExpr -> (Bool, CoreExpr) +dropInline (Note InlineMe rhs) = (True, rhs) +dropInline rhs = (False, rhs) \end{code} %************************************************************************