| Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author |
|---|
|
This commit addresses issue #275
This commit includes following changes:
1. legalize function parameter IRParam instructions
2. legalize function parameter types in IRFuncType
3. legalize call sites (IRCall) with proper arguments
4. legalize local vars that has a mixed resource type.
|
|
* Don't auto-enable IR use for compute tests
The `COMPARE_COMPUTE` and `COMPARE_RENDER_COMPUTE` test fixtures were set up to always enable the `-use-ir` flag on Slang, which precludes having any tests that confirm functionality on the old non-IR path (which is still required by our main customer).
This change adds the `-xslang -use-ir` flags explicitly to any compute test cases that left them out, and makes the fixture no longer add it by default.
* Continue building out parameter block support
The initial front-end logic for parameter blocks was already added, but they are still missing a bunch of functionality. This change addresses some of the known issues:
- Bug fix: don't try to emit HLSL `register` bindings for variables that consume whole register spaces/sets
- Overhaul type layout logic so that it can make decisions based on a given code generation target (currently passed in as a `TargetRequest`), which allows us to decide whether or not a parameter block should get its own register set on a per-target basis.
- Always use a register space/set for Vulkan
- Never use a register space/set for HLSL SM 5.0 and lower
- By default, don't use register spaces/sets for HLSL output
- Add a command-line flag and some "target flags" to enable register-space usage for D3D targets
- Hackily add initial support for parameter blocks in the AST-to-AST path
- This just blindly lowers `ParameterBlock<T>` to `T`, which shouldn't quite work
- A more complete overhaul will probably need to wait until the AST-to-AST legalization is changed to use the `LegalType`s from the IR legalization pass.
- Add a compute-based test case to actually run code using parameter blocks
- This file runs test cases both with and without the IR
|
|
* IR: Add support for break and continue statements
The front-end is already doing the work of connecting this statements to their "parent" statement, so we just needed to build a map from the `Stmt*` to the corresponding `IRBlock*`s to use for break/continue when outputting any loop statement, and then look up in the map for the branch target when outputting a break/continue.
When we get around to adding `switch` statements, the same pattern should work just fine.
I also added support for `do/while` statements in IR codegen, and made sure to exercise those in one of the test cases I added.
There is also an unrelated IR codegen fix for when there is a "bound subscript" on the RHS of an assignment.
* IR: fix handling of do/while and continue
Thanks to @csyonghe for pointing out my mistake in the earlier commit.
I implemented `continue` for `do/while` loops incorrectly, branching to the head of the loop instead of the loop test.
I'll try to blame this mistake on the fact that I never use `do/while` loops because I think they are awful. :)
The fix for that issue wasn't too bad (see `lower-to-ir.cpp`) but it surfaces a much more serious issue: I wasn't actually implementing `continue` correctly *at all* when it comes to generating HLSL/GLSL from the IR (I can't easily make an excuse for that one).
The basic issue at the heart of this is that given an input statement like:
```
for(int ii = 0; ii < N; ii = doSomething(ii))
{ ... }
```
The continue clause (`ii = doSomething(ii)`) could expand into many instructions (across multiple blocks, if we inline), and there is in general no guarantee when we are done that we can package up that code as an expression and spit out a new `for` loop (the same basic argument applies to a `do { ... } while(someComplexExpression())`.
So, if we assume that in general we have to generate a full *statement* for the `continue` clause, what can we emit?
- We could try to "outline" the continue code into its own function, so that we can call it from an expression. That could work, but has high implementation complexity.
- We could introduce additional `bool` variables for control flow, outputting something like:
```
bool useContinueBlock = false;
for(;;) {
if(useContinueBlock) { <CONTINUE CODE>; }
useContinueBlock = true;
<LOOP TEST>
<LOOP BODY>
}
```
This works but user might balk at the extra variable we introduce.
- We could duplicate the code at each continue site. That is, we emit the loop as:
```
for(;;) {
<LOOP TEST>
<LOOP BODY>
<CONTINUE CODE>
}
```
but then whenever we'd like to emit `continue;` we instead emit `{ <CONTINUE CODE>; continue; }`.
This doesn't introduce any extra variables, but it causes code duplication (limited, if we don't have too many `continue` sites, and the continue clause is small - which are the common cases).
When I was initially working on the IR codegen I picked that last option just because it is what `fxc` seems to do, but I neglected to actually *implement* the special-case codegen for a `continue` instruction. This change addresses that (see `emit.cpp`).
Finally, once things were fixed the `continue` test case produced the results Yong told me to expect, but it also produced a warning from the downstream HLSL compiler ("hey, your loop doesn't ever actually *loop*!"), so I reworked the test back to one that actually loops (but still tests `continue`).
As a final aside in this essay of a commit message: the current IR representation of control flow uses special-case instructions for various cases of unconditional branch (and two variations on `if`), but these are not strictly necessary, and a future change will hopefully clean it up. The biggest catch in doing that is that it will require the IR->source codegen to carefully track which blocks represent which kinds of branch targets in context (e.g., you can't assume that a `continue` that nees the special handling above will appear as a distinct kind of instruction).
|
|
- Add definition of `discard` instruction
- A `discard` is a terminator instruction, just like `returnVoid`
- Lower `DiscardStmt` in AST to a `discard` instruction in the IR
- Emit `discard` instruction as a `discard;` statement when emitting HLSL/GLSL
- Add a test case using the "graphics compute" mode that tests discard. The test writes to one entry in a UAV before doing a conditional (always true at runtime) discard, and then writes to another entry; we expect to see the results of the first write, but not the second.
|
|
* improve diagnostic messages and prevent fatal errors from crashing the compiler.
* fix top level exception catching.
* spelling fix
* change wording of invalidSwizzleExpr diagnostic
* add speculative GenericsApp expr parsing
* add new test case of cascading generics call.
* Fixing bugs in compiling cascaded generic function calls.
Add implementation of DeclaredSubTypeWitness::SubstituteImpl()
This is not needed by the type checker, but needed by IR specialization. When input source contains cascading generic function call, the arguments to `specialize` instruction is currently represented as a substitution. The arg values of this subsittution can be a `DeclaredSubTypeWitness` when a generic function uses one of its generic parameter to specialize another generic function. When the top level generics function is being specialized, this substitution argument, which is a `DeclaredSubTypeWitness`, needs to be substituted with the witness that used to specialize the top level function in the specialized specialize instruction as well.
* add a test case for cascading generic function call.
* parser bug fix
* fixes #255
* add test case for issue #255
* Generate missing `specialize` instruction when calling a generic method from an interface constraint.
When calling a generic method via an interface, we should be generating the following ir:
...
f = lookup_interface_method(...)
f_s = specailize(f, declRef)
...
This commit fixes this `emitFuncRef` function to emit the needed `specialize` instruction.
* fixes #260
This fix follows the second apporach in the disucssion. It generated mangled name for specialized functions by appending new substitution type names to the original mangled name.
* Disabling removing and re-inserting specailized functions in getSpecalizeFunc()
I am not sure why it is needed, it seems HLSL and GLSL backends are generating forward declarations anyways, so the order of functions in IRModule shouldn't matter.
* cleanup and complete test cases.
* fix warnings
|
|
- During IR emit, treat a "select" expression (`?:` operator) like any other `InvokeExpr`, since it will have an `__intrinsic_op` modifier attached to turn it into a `select` instruction.
- During HLSL/GLSL emit from IR, turn a `select` instruction into a `?:` expression
- Also add support for the `neg` instruction during HLSL/GLSL emit
Note that right now we are assuming HLSL semantics for `?:` where it does not short-circuit. Correctly handling the GLSL case would require going back to special-case codegen for `SelectExpr`, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- When peforming ordinary lookup, if the container declaration for a scope is an aggregate type or `extension` decl, then use a "breadcrumb" to make sure that we use a `this` expression as the base of any resulting declaration reference
- Add a test case for implicit `this` usage
- Update constrained generic test case to use implicit `this` for member reference, as was originally intended
|
|
This is the first step towards supporting traditional object-oriented method definitions; the second step will be to allow `this` expressions to be implicit.
- Add a test case using explicit `this`, and expected output
- Update parsing logic for expressions so that it handled identifiers similarly to the declaration and statement logic: first try to parse using a syntax declaration looked up in the curent scope, and otherwise fall back to the ordinary `VarExpr` case.
* As long as I'm making that change: switch `true` and `false` to be parsed via the callback mechanism rather than be special-cased.
* This change will also help out if we ever wanted to add `super`/`base` expressions, `new`, `sizeof`/`alignof` or any other expression keywords.
- Add a `ThisExpr` node and register a parser callback for it.
- Add semantic checks for `ThisExpr`: basically just look upwards through scopes until we find either an aggregate type declaration or an `extension` declaration, and then use that as the type of the expression.
- TODO: eventually we need to guard against a `this` expression inside of a `static` member.
- The IR generation logic already handled creation of `this` parameters in function signatures; the missing piece was to register the appropriate parameter in the context, so that we can use it as the lowering of a `this` expression.
|
|
This change includes a lot of infrastructure work, but the main point is to allow code like the following:
```
// define an interface
interface Helper { float help(); }
// define a generic function that uses the interface
float test<T : Helper>( T t ) { return t.help(); }
// define a type that implements the interface
struct A : Helper { float help() { return 1.0 } }
// define an ordinary function that calls the
// generic function with a concrete type:
float doIt()
{
A a;
return test<A>(a);
}
```
Getting this to generate valid code involves a lot of steps. This change includes the initial version of all of these steps, but leaves a lot of gaps where more complete implementation is required.
The changes include:
- Member lookup on types has been centralized, and now handles the case where the type we are looking for a member in is a generic parameter (e.g., given `t.help()` we can now look up `help` in `Helper` by knowing that `t` is a `T` and `T` conforms to `Helper`).
- There is an obvious cleanup still to be done here where the same exact logic should be used to look up available "constructor" declarations inside a type when the type is used like a function.
- Add a notion of subtype constraint "wittnesses" to the type system. When a generic is declared as taking `<T : Helper>` it really takes two generic parameters: the type `T` and a proof that `T` conforms to `Helper`. The actual arguments to a generic will then include both the type argument and a suitable witness argument (both type-level values).
- As it stands right now, a witness wraps a `DeclRef` to the declaration that represents the appropriate subtype relationship. So if we have `struct A : Helper`, that `: Helper` part turns into an `InheritanceDecl` member, and a reference to that member can serve as a witness to the fact that `A` conforms to `Helper`.
- Make explicit generic application `G<A,B>` synthesize the additional arguments that represent conformances required by the generic.
- This does *not* yet deal with the case where a generic is implicitly specialized as part of an ordinary call `G(a,b)`
- A bug fix to not auto-specialize generics during lookup. The problem here was related to an attempted fix of an earlier issue.
During checking of a method nested in a generic type, we were running into problems where `DeclRefType::create()` was getting called on an un-specialized reference to `vector`, and this was leading to a crash when the code looked for the arguments for the generic. This was worked around by having name lookup automatically specialize any generics it runs into while going through lookup contexts.
That choice creates the problem that in a generic method like this:
```
void test<T>(T val) { ... }
```
any reference to `val` inside the body of `test` will end up getting specialized so that it is effectively `test<T>::val`, when that isn't really needed.
- Add front-end logic to check that when a type claims to conform to an interface it actually must provide the methods required by the interface. The checking process goes ahead and builds a front-end "witness table" that maps declarations in the interface being conformed to over to their concrete implementations for the type.
- At the moment the checking is completely broken and bad: it assumes that *any* member with the right name is an appropriate declaration to satisfy a requirement. That obviously needs to be fixed.
- Add an explicit operation to the IR for lookup of methods: `lookup_interface_method(w, r)` where `w` is a reference to the "witness" value and `r` is an `IRDeclRef` for the member we want to look up.
- Add an explicit notion of witness tables to the IR. These end up being the IR representation of an `InheritanceDecl` in a type, and they are generated by enumerating the members that satisfy the interface requirements (which were handily already enumerated by the front-end checking). The witness table is an explicit IR value, and so it will be referenced/used at the site where conformance is being exploited (e.g., as part of a `specialize` call), so it should be safe to eliminate witness tables that are unused (since they represent conformances that aren't actually exploited). Similarly, the entries in a witness table are uses of the functions that implement interface methods, and so keep those live.
- In order to implement the above, I did a bit of a cleanup pass on the IR representation so that there is an `IRUser` base that `IRInst` inherits from, so that we can have users of values that aren't instructions.
- One annoying thing is that because of how types and generics are handled in the IR, we needed a way to have a type-level `Val` that wraps an IR-level value: e.g., to allow an IR-level witness table to be used as one of the arguments for specialization of a generic. The design I chose here is to have a "proxy" `Val` subclass (`IRProxyVal`) that wraps an `IRValue*`. These should only ever appear as part of types and `DeclRef`s that are used by the IR.
- One annoying bit here is that an IR value might then have a use that is not manifest in the set of IR instructions, and instead only appears as part of a type somewhere.
- I'm not 100% happy with this design, but it seems like we'd have to tackle similar issues if/when we eventually allow functions to have `constexpr` or `@Constant` parameters
- Make generic specialization also propagate witness table arguments through to their use sites (this is mostly just the existing substitution machinery, once we have `IRProxyVal`), and then include logic to specialize `lookup_interface_method` instructions when their first operand is a concrete witness table.
All of this work allows a single limited test using generics with constraints to pass, but more work is needed to make the solution robust.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
vertex/fragment shader pair, but instead of comparing the resulting framebuffer, it expects the test shader to write results into a UAV, and compares the pixel shader UAV output to the reference output.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Fix up emission of shader parameter semantics when using IR
- Make sure to propagate entry point parameter layouts down to IR parameters when doing the initial cloning to form target-specific IR
- When layout information is present on an IR node, prefer to use that over the original high-level declaration for outputting semantics in final HLSL
- Fix up test runner to generate `.actual` files when running compute tests, in cases where the `render-test` application errors out (e.g., because of a Slang compilation error)
- Add a first test of generics functionality, to show that they generate valid code through the IR
- Right now this test is *not* using any "interesting" operations on the type parameter, so this is not a test that can confirm that interface constraints work
* fixup: skip compute tests when running on Linux
|
|
testing framework.
|
