FLD instruction x64 bit - delphi

I have a little problem with FLD instruction in x64 bit ...
want to load Double value to the stack pointer FPU in st0 register, but it seem to be impossible.
In Delphi x32, I can use this code :
function DoSomething(X:Double):Double;
asm
FLD X
// Do Something ..
FST Result
end;
Unfortunately, in x64, the same code does not work.

Delphi inherite Microsoft x64 Calling Convention.
So if arguments of function/procedure are float/double, they are passed in XMM0L, XMM1L, XMM2L, and XMM3L registers.
But you can use var before parameter as workaround like:
function DoSomething(var X:Double):Double;
asm
FLD qword ptr [X]
// Do Something ..
FST Result
end;

In x64 mode floating point parameters are passed in xmm-registers. So when Delphi tries to compile FLD X, it becomes FLD xmm0 but there is no such instruction. You first need to move it to memory.
The same goes with the result, it should be passed back in xmm0.
Try this (not tested):
function DoSomething(X:Double):Double;
var
Temp : double;
asm
MOVQ qword ptr Temp,X
FLD Temp
//do something
FST Temp
MOVQ xmm0,qword ptr Temp
end;

You don't need to use legacy x87 stack registers in x86-64 code, because SSE2 is baseline, a required part of the x86-64 ISA. You can and should do your scalar FP math using addsd, mulsd, sqrtsd and so on, on XMM registers. (Or addss for float)
The Windows x64 calling convention passes float/double FP args in XMM0..3, if they're one of the first four args to the function. (i.e. the 3rd total arg goes in xmm2 if it's FP, rather than the 3rd FP arg going in xmm2.) It returns FP values in XMM0.
Only use x87 if you actually need 80-bit precision inside your function. (Instructions like fsin and fyl2x are not fast, and can usually be done just as well by normal math libraries using SSE/SSE2 instructions.
function times2(X:Double):Double;
asm
addsd xmm0, xmm0 // upper 8 bytes of XMM0 are ignored
ret
end
Storing to memory and reloading into an x87 register costs you about 10 cycles of latency for no benefit. SSE/SSE2 scalar instructions are just as fast, or faster, than their x87 equivalents, and easier to program for and optimize because you never need fxch; it's a flat register design instead of stack-based. (https://agner.org/optimize/). Also, you have 15 XMM registers.
Of course, you usually don't need inline asm at all. It could be useful for manually-vectorizing if the compiler doesn't do that for you.

Related

No memory source operand for crc32 in Delphi 11? [duplicate]

I am trying to assemble the code below using yasm. I have put 'here' comments where yasm reports the error "error: invalid size for operand 2". Why is this error happening ?
segment .data
a db 25
b dw 0xffff
c dd 3456
d dq -14
segment .bss
res resq 1
segment .text
global _start
_start:
movsx rax, [a] ; here
movsx rbx, [b] ; here
movsxd rcx, [c] ; here
mov rdx, [d]
add rcx, rdx
add rbx, rcx
add rax, rbx
mov [res], rax
ret
For most instructions, the width of the register operand implies the width of the memory operand, because both operands have to be the same size. e.g. mov rdx, [d] implies mov rdx, qword [d] because you used a 64-bit register.
But the same movsx / movzx mnemonics are used for the byte-source and word-source opcodes, so it's ambiguous unless the source is a register (like movzx eax, cl). Another example is crc32 r32, r/m8 vs. r/m16 vs. r/m32. (Unlike movsx/zx, its source size can be as wide as the operand-size.)
movsx / movzx with a memory source always need the width of the memory operand specified explicitly.
The movsxd mnemonic is supposed to imply a 32-bit source size. movsxd rcx, [c] assembles with NASM, but apparently not with YASM. YASM requires you to write dword, even though it doesn't accept byte, word, or qword there, and it doesn't accept movsx rcx, dword [c] either (i.e. it requires the movsxd mnemonic for 32-bit source operands).
In NASM, movsx rcx, dword [c] assembles to movsxd, but movsxd rcx, word [c] is still rejected. i.e. in NASM, plain movsx is fully flexible, but movsxd is still rigid. I'd still recommend using dword to make the width of the load explicit, for the benefit of humans.
movsx rax, byte [a]
movsx rbx, word [b]
movsxd rcx, dword [c]
Note that the "operand size" of the instruction (as determined by the operand-size prefix to make it 16-bit, or REX.W=1 to make it 64-bit) is the destination width for movsx / movzx. Different source sizes use different opcodes.
In case it's not obvious, there's no movzxd because 32-bit mov already zero-extends to 64-bit implicitly. movsxd eax, ecx is encodeable, but not recommended (use mov instead).
In AT&T syntax, you need to explicitly specify both the source and destination width in the mnemonic, like movsbq (%rsi), %rax. GAS won't let you write movsb (%rsi), %eax to infer a destination width (operand-size) because movsb/movsw/etc are the mnemonics for string-move instructions with implicit (%rsi), (%rdi) operands.
Fun fact: GAS and clang do allow it for things like movzb (%rsi), %eax as movzbl, but GAS only has extra logic to allow disambiguation (not just inferring size) based on operands when it's necessary, like movsd (%rsi), %xmm0 vs. movsd. (Clang12.0.1 actually does accept movsb (%rcx), %eax as movsbl, but GAS 2.36.1 doesn't, so for portability it's best to be explicit with sign-extension, and not a bad idea for zero-extension too.)
Other stuff about your source code:
NASM/YASM allow you to use the segment keyword instead of section, but really you're giving ELF section names, not executable segment names. Also, you can put read-only data in section .rodata (which is linked as part of the text segment). What's the difference of section and segment in ELF file format.
You can't ret from _start. It's not a function, it's your ELF entry point. The first thing on the stack is argc, not a valid return address. Use this to exit cleanly:
xor edi,edi
mov eax, 231
syscall ; sys_exit_group(0)
See the x86 tag wiki for links to more useful guides (and debugging tips at the bottom).

Asm equivalent to a delphi procedure

I have a simple delphi function called SetCompare that compares two singles and if they are not equal then one value is set to the other.
procedure SetCompare( A : single; B : single );
begin
if( A <> B ) then
A := B;
end;
I am trying to convert this into asm as such:
procedure SetCompare( A : Single; B : Single ); register;
begin
asm
mov EAX,A
mov ECX,B
cmp EAX,ECX
jne SetValue
#SetValue:
mov EAX,ECX
end;
end;
Will this work?
Will this work?
No this will not work, because floating point comparison is not the same as binary comparison. For instance 0 and -0 have different bit patterns, but compare as equal. Similarly, NaN compares unequal to all values, including a NaN with the same bit pattern.
The simplest way to work out how to write your code is to get the compiler to compile the Pascal code, and inspect the generated assembly code.
Some asides:
Your function is pointless anyway, because it returns no value and has no side effects.
If performance matters enough to write assembler, then you should write pure assembler functions, rather than inline asm blocks in a Pascal function. Which in any case is not supported by the x64 compiler.
Your arguments are already in registers, so it makes little sense to copy them around to other registers. For x86 code, A arrives in EAX, and B arrives in EDX. Given that EAX already contains A, why would you copy it into EAX? It is already there. And B is already in EDX, why copy it to ECX? For x64 code, the two arguments are passed in floating point registers, and can be compared there directly. As soon as your start writing assembler you need to understand the register use of the calling convention.
Your jne is pointless. If execution does not take the jump, then it moves to the next line of code. Which is where you jumped to.

Inline asm (32) emulation of move (copy memory) command

I have two two-dimensional arrays with dynamic sizes (guess that's the proper wording). I copy the content of first one into the other using:
dest:=copy(src,0,4*x*y);
// src,dest:array of array of longint; x,y:longint;
// setlength(both arrays,x,y); //x and y are max 15 bit positive!
It works. However I'm unable to reproduce this in asm. I tried the following variations to no avail... Could someone enlighten me...
MOV ESI,src; MOV EDI,dest; MOV EBX,y; MOV EAX,x; MUL EBX;
PUSH DS; POP ES; MOV ECX,EAX; CLD; REP MOVSD;
Also tried with LEA (didn't expect that to work since it should fetch the pointer address not the array address), no workie, and tried with:
p1:=#src[0,0]; p2:=#dest[0,0]; //being no-type pointers
MOV ESI,p1; MOV EDI,p2... (the same asm)
Hints pls? Btw it's delphi 6. The error is, of course, access violation.
This is really a two-fold three-fold question.
What's the structure of a dynamic array.
Which instructions in asm will copy the array.
I'm throwing random assembler at the CPU, why doesn't it work?
Structure of a dynamic array
See: http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Seattle/en/Internal_Data_Formats
To quote:
Dynamic Array Types
On the 32-bit platform, a dynamic-array variable occupies 4 bytes of memory (and 8 bytes on 64-bit) that contain a pointer to the dynamically allocated array. When the variable is empty (uninitialized) or holds a zero-length array, the pointer is nil and no dynamic memory is associated with the variable. For a nonempty array, the variable points to a dynamically allocated block of memory that contains the array in addition to a 32-bit (64-bit on Win64) length indicator and a 32-bit reference count. The table below shows the layout of a dynamic-array memory block.
Dynamic array memory layout (32-bit and 64-bit)
Offset 32-bit -8 -4 0
Offset 64-bit -12 -8 0
contents refcount count start of data
So the dynamic array variable is a pointer to the middle of the above structure.
How do I access this in asm
Let's assume the array holds records of type TMyRec
you'll need to run this code for every inner array in the outer array to do the deep copy. I leave this as an exercise for the reader. (you can do the other part in pascal).
type
TDynArr: array of TMyRec;
procedure SlowButBasicMove(const Source: TDynArr; var dest);
asm
//insert register pushes, see below.
mov esi,Source //esi = pointer to source data
mov edi,Dest //edi = pointer to dest
sub esi,8
mov ebx,[esi] //ebx = refcount (just in case)
mov ecx,[esi+4] //ecx = element count
mov edx,SizeOf(TMyRec) //anywhere from 1 to zillions
mul ecx,edx //==ecx=number of bytes in array.
//// now we can start moving
xor ebx,ebx //ebx =0
add eax,8 //eax = #data
#loop:
mov eax,[esi+ebx] //Get data from source
mov [edi+ebx],esi //copy it to dest
add ebx,4 //4 bytes at a time
cmp ebx,ecx //is ebx> number of bytes?
jle loop
//Done copying.
//insert register pops, see below
end;
That's the copy done, however in order for the system not to crash, you need to save and restore the non volatile registers (all but EAX, ECX, EDX), see: http://docwiki.embarcadero.com/RADStudio/Seattle/en/Program_Control
push ebx
push esi
push edi
--- insert code shown above
//restore non-volatile registers
pop edi
pop esi
pop ebx //note the restoring must happen in the reverse order of the push.
See the Jeff Dunteman's book assembly step by step if you're completely new to asm.
You will get access violations if:
you try to read from a wrong address.
you try to write to a wrong adress.
you read past the end of the array.
you write to memory you haven't claimed before using GetMem or whatever means.
if you write past the end of your buffer.
if you do not restore all non-volatile registers
Remember you're directly dealing with the CPU. Delphi will not assist you in any way.
Really fast code will use some form of SSE to move 16bytes per instruction in an unrolled loop, see the above mentioned fastcode for examples of optimized assembler.
Random assembler
In assembler you need to know exactly what you're what to do, how and what the CPU does.
Set a breakpoint and run your code. Press ctrl + alt + C and behold the CPU-debug window.
This will allow you to see the code Delphi generates.
You can single step through the code to see what the CPU does.
see: http://www.plantation-productions.com/Webster/index.html
For more reading.
Dynamic Arrays differ from Static Arrays, especially when it comes to multi-dimensionality.
Refer to this reference for internal formats.
The point is that an Array Of Array Of LongInt of dimensions X and Y (in this order!) is a pointer to an array of X pointers that point to an array of Y LongInts.
Since it seems, from your comments, that you have already allocated the space for all elements in Dest, I assume you want to do a Deep Copy.
Here a sample program, where the assembly as been made as simple as possible for the sake of clarity.
Program Test;
Var Src, Dest: Array Of Array Of LongInt;
X, Y, I, J: Integer;
Begin
X := 4;
Y := 2;
setLength(Src, X, Y);
setLength(Dest, X, Y);
For I := 0 To X-1 Do
For J := 0 To Y-1 Do
Src[I,J] := I*Y + J;
{$ASMMODE intel}
Asm
cld ;Be sure movsd increments the registers
mov esi, DWORD PTR [Src] ;Src pointer
mov edi, DWORD PTR [Dest] ;Dest pointer
mov ecx, DWORD PTR [X] ;Repeat for X times
;The number of elements in Src
#_copy:
push esi ;Save these for later
push edi
push ecx
mov ecx, DWORD PTR [Y] ;Repeat for Y times
;The number of element in a Src[i] array
mov edi, DWORD PTR [edi] ;Get the pointer to the Dest[i] array
mov esi, DWORD PTR [esi] ;Get the pointer to the Src[i] array
rep movsd ;Copy sub array
pop ecx ;Restore
pop edi
pop esi
add esi, 04h ;Go from Src[i] to Src[i+1]
add edi, 04h ;Go from Dest[i] to Dest[i+1]
loop #_copy
End;
For I := 0 To X-1 Do
Begin
WriteLn();
For J := 0 To Y-1 Do
Begin
Write(' ');
Write(Dest[I,J]);
End;
End;
End.
Note 1 This source code is intended to be compile with freepascal.
Donation of Spare Time(TM) for downloading and installing Delphi are welcome!
Note 2 This source code is for illustration purpose only, it is pretty obvious, it has already been stated above, but somehow not everybody got it.
If the OP wanted a fast way to copy the array, they should have stated so.
Note 3 I don't save the clobbered registers, this is bad practice, my bad; I forgot, as there are no subroutines, no optimizations and no reason for the compiler to pass data in the registers between the two fors.
This is left as an exercise to the reader.

Accessing Delphi Class Fields in 64 bit inline assembler

I am trying to convert the Delphi TBits.GetBit to inline assembler for the 64 bit version. The VCL source looks like this:
function TBits.GetBit(Index: Integer): Boolean;
{$IFNDEF X86ASM}
var
LRelInt: PInteger;
LMask: Integer;
begin
if (Index >= FSize) or (Index < 0) then
Error;
{ Calculate the address of the related integer }
LRelInt := FBits;
Inc(LRelInt, Index div BitsPerInt);
{ Generate the mask }
LMask := (1 shl (Index mod BitsPerInt));
Result := (LRelInt^ and LMask) <> 0;
end;
{$ELSE X86ASM}
asm
CMP Index,[EAX].FSize
JAE TBits.Error
MOV EAX,[EAX].FBits
BT [EAX],Index
SBB EAX,EAX
AND EAX,1
end;
{$ENDIF X86ASM}
I started converting the 32 bit ASM code to 64 bit. After some searching, I found out that I need to change the EAX references to RAX for the 64 bit compiler. I ended up with this for the first line:
CMP Index,[RAX].FSize
This compiles but gives an access violation when it runs. I tried a few combinations (e.g. MOV ECX,[RAX].FSize) and get the same access violation when trying to access [RAX].FSize. When I look at the assembler that is generated by the Delphi compiler, it looks like my [RAX].FSize should be correct.
Unit72.pas.143: MOV ECX,[RAX].FSize
00000000006963C0 8B8868060000 mov ecx,[rax+$00000668]
And the Delphi generated code:
Unit72.pas.131: if (Index >= FSize) or (Index < 0) then
00000000006963CF 488B4550 mov rax,[rbp+$50]
00000000006963D3 8B4D58 mov ecx,[rbp+$58]
00000000006963D6 3B8868060000 cmp ecx,[rax+$00000668]
00000000006963DC 7D06 jnl TForm72.GetBit + $24
00000000006963DE 837D5800 cmp dword ptr [rbp+$58],$00
00000000006963E2 7D09 jnl TForm72.GetBit + $2D
In both cases, the resulting assembler uses [rax+$00000668] for FSize. What is the correct way to access a class field in Delphi 64bit Assembler?
This may sound like a strange thing to optimize but the assembler for the 64bit pascal version doesn't appear to be very efficient. We call this routine a large number of times and it takes anything up to 5 times as long to execute depending on various factors.
The basic problem is that you are using the wrong register. Self is passed as an implicit parameter, before all others. In the x64 calling convention, that means it is passed in RCX and not RAX.
So Self is passed in RCX and Index is passed in RDX. Frankly, I think it's a mistake to use parameter names in inline assembler because they hide the fact that the parameter was passed in a register. If you happen to overwrite either RDX, then that changes the apparent value of Index.
So the if statement might be coded as
CMP EDX,[RCX].FSize
JNL TBits.Error
CMP EDX,0
JL TBits.Error
FWIW, this is a really simple function to implement and I don't believe that you will need to use any stack space. You have enough registers in x64 to be able to do this entirely using volatile registers.

How Can I Get Around this EOutOfMemory Exception When Encoding a Very Large File?

I am using Delphi 2009 with Unicode strings.
I'm trying to Encode a very large file to convert it to Unicode:
var
Buffer: TBytes;
Value: string;
Value := Encoding.GetString(Buffer);
This works fine for a Buffer of 40 MB that gets doubled in size and returns Value as an 80 MB Unicode string.
When I try this with a 300 MB Buffer, it gives me an EOutOfMemory exception.
Well, that wasn't totally unexpected. But I decided to trace it through anyway.
It goes into the DynArraySetLength procedure in the System unit. In that procedure, it goes to the heap and calls ReallocMem. To my surprise, it successfully allocates 665,124,864 bytes!!!
But then towards the end of DynArraySetLength, it calls FillChar:
// Set the new memory to all zero bits
FillChar((PAnsiChar(p) + elSize * oldLength)^, elSize * (newLength - oldLength), 0);
You can see by the comment what that is supposed to do. There is not much to that routine, but that is the routine that causes the EOutOfMemory exception. Here is FillChar from the System unit:
procedure _FillChar(var Dest; count: Integer; Value: Char);
{$IFDEF PUREPASCAL}
var
I: Integer;
P: PAnsiChar;
begin
P := PAnsiChar(#Dest);
for I := count-1 downto 0 do
P[I] := Value;
end;
{$ELSE}
asm // Size = 153 Bytes
CMP EDX, 32
MOV CH, CL // Copy Value into both Bytes of CX
JL ##Small
MOV [EAX ], CX // Fill First 8 Bytes
MOV [EAX+2], CX
MOV [EAX+4], CX
MOV [EAX+6], CX
SUB EDX, 16
FLD QWORD PTR [EAX]
FST QWORD PTR [EAX+EDX] // Fill Last 16 Bytes
FST QWORD PTR [EAX+EDX+8]
MOV ECX, EAX
AND ECX, 7 // 8-Byte Align Writes
SUB ECX, 8
SUB EAX, ECX
ADD EDX, ECX
ADD EAX, EDX
NEG EDX
##Loop:
FST QWORD PTR [EAX+EDX] // Fill 16 Bytes per Loop
FST QWORD PTR [EAX+EDX+8]
ADD EDX, 16
JL ##Loop
FFREE ST(0)
FINCSTP
RET
NOP
NOP
NOP
##Small:
TEST EDX, EDX
JLE ##Done
MOV [EAX+EDX-1], CL // Fill Last Byte
AND EDX, -2 // No. of Words to Fill
NEG EDX
LEA EDX, [##SmallFill + 60 + EDX * 2]
JMP EDX
NOP // Align Jump Destinations
NOP
##SmallFill:
MOV [EAX+28], CX
MOV [EAX+26], CX
MOV [EAX+24], CX
MOV [EAX+22], CX
MOV [EAX+20], CX
MOV [EAX+18], CX
MOV [EAX+16], CX
MOV [EAX+14], CX
MOV [EAX+12], CX
MOV [EAX+10], CX
MOV [EAX+ 8], CX
MOV [EAX+ 6], CX
MOV [EAX+ 4], CX
MOV [EAX+ 2], CX
MOV [EAX ], CX
RET // DO NOT REMOVE - This is for Alignment
##Done:
end;
{$ENDIF}
So my memory was allocated, but it crashed trying to fill it with zeros. This doesn't make sense to me. As far as I'm concerned, the memory doesn't even need to be filled with zeros - and that is probably a time waster anyhow - since the Encoding statement is about to fill it anyway.
Can I somehow prevent Delphi from doing the memory fill?
Or is there some other way I can get Delphi to allocate this memory successfully for me?
My real goal is to do that Encoding statement for my very large file, so any solution that will allow this would be much appreciated.
Conclusion: See my comments on the answers.
This is a warning to be careful in debugging assembler code. Make sure you break on all the "RET" lines, since I missed the one in the middle of the FillChar routine and erroneously concluded that FillChar caused the problem. Thanks Mason, for pointing this out.
I will have to break the input into Chunks to handle the very large file.
FillChar isn't allocating any memory, so that's not your problem. Try tracing into it and placing breakpoints at the RET statements, and you'll see that the FillChar finishes. Whatever the problem is, it's probably in a later step.
Read a chunk from the file, encode and write to another file, repeat.
A wild guess: Could the problem be memory being overcommitted and when the FillChar actually accesses the memory it can't find a page to actually give you? I don't know if Windows will even overcommit memory, I do know that some OSes do--you don't find out about it until you actually try to make use of the memory.
If this is the case it could cause the blowup in FillChar.
Programs are great at looping. They loop tirelessly without complaining.
Allocating a huge amount of memory takes time. There will be many calls to the heap manager. Your OS won't even know if it has the amount of contiguous memory that you need ahead of time. Your OS says, yeah, I have 1 GB free. But as soon as you go to use it, your OS says, wait, you want all of it in one chunk? Let me make sure I have enough all in one place. If it doesn't you get the error.
If it does have the memory, well, there's still a lot of work for the heap manager in preparing the memory and marking it as used.
So, obviously, it makes some sense to allocate less memory and simply loop through it. This saves the computer from doing a lot of work that it will only have to undo when it's done. Why not have it do just a little bit of work in setting aside your memory, then just keep re-using it?
Stack memory is allocated much faster than heap memory. If you keep your memory usage small (under 1 MB, by default), the compiler may just use stack memory over heap memory, which will make your loops even faster. In addition, local variables that get allocated in the register are very fast.
There are factors such as hard drive cluster and cache sizes, CPU cache sizes, and things, that offer hints about the best chunk sizes. The key is to find a good number. I like to use 64 KB chunks.

Resources