Skip to content

[BOLT] Always run CheckLargeFunctions in non-relocation mode #80922

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 8, 2024
Merged

[BOLT] Always run CheckLargeFunctions in non-relocation mode #80922

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
5 changes: 1 addition & 4 deletions bolt/lib/Passes/BinaryPasses.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -554,11 +554,8 @@ void CheckLargeFunctions::runOnFunctions(BinaryContext &BC) {
if (BC.HasRelocations)
return;

if (!opts::UpdateDebugSections)
return;

// If the function wouldn't fit, mark it as non-simple. Otherwise, we may emit
// incorrect debug info.
// incorrect meta data.
ParallelUtilities::WorkFuncTy WorkFun = [&](BinaryFunction &BF) {
uint64_t HotSize, ColdSize;
std::tie(HotSize, ColdSize) =
Expand Down
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions bolt/lib/Rewrite/RewriteInstance.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -3631,6 +3631,7 @@ void RewriteInstance::mapCodeSections(BOLTLinker::SectionMapper MapSection) {
Function.setImageAddress(FuncSection->getAllocAddress());
Function.setImageSize(FuncSection->getOutputSize());
if (Function.getImageSize() > Function.getMaxSize()) {
assert(!BC->isX86() && "Unexpected large function.");
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@yota9, @mtvec – would it be correct to check if the function has constant islands instead?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To clarify the question, could you test it on your side with assertion changed to check for CIs? Ideally, the check should be properly modified to accommodate for CIs on supported architectures.

TooLarge = true;
FailedAddresses.emplace_back(Function.getAddress());
}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -5367,6 +5368,7 @@ void RewriteInstance::rewriteFile() {
continue;

if (Function->getImageSize() > Function->getMaxSize()) {
assert(!BC->isX86() && "Unexpected large function.");
if (opts::Verbosity >= 1)
errs() << "BOLT-WARNING: new function size (0x"
<< Twine::utohexstr(Function->getImageSize())
Expand Down