CS 105C: Lecture 11

Last Time...

What you don’t use, you don’t pay for. And further: What you do use, you couldn’t hand code any better.

Heterogeneous Collections

Pay for them even if you don't use them!

a = [1, "1", 1.0]

\( O(N) \) indexing

Indirect storage

Other cases of pay-without-use

Green Threads

User-level threads managed by the language runtime.

 

Can be left unused, but they have to be included in the language runtime regardless.

Garbage Collection

Garbage-collected systems must have all their memory in garbage collection.

 

Incur the cost of running gc even if we know exactly when all memory can be freed.

C++ Zero-Cost Abstractions

std::unique_ptr

std::vector

Speed difference: tens of seconds in 24 hours.

Element access is identical assembly code to raw array access, because some parts can be done at compile-time.

Vector copy code is 15% faster than handwritten naive copy code!

Questions!

 Q: Are shared pointers zero cost? 

A: What do we mean by zero cost?

 

Under the definition that Bjarne Stroustrup gives us, they are zero cost.

 

But shared pointers are not free! (Not even close!)

 Q: Why do people write programs in other languages if C++ is so fast? 

A:

A:

From Lecture 0: while it is not true that C++ is a language for experts only, it is a language that requires discipline and knowledge from its users in order to be effective.

A:

Performance matters. But it doesn't always matter where we think it does.

CS 105C: Lecture 11

More Zero-Cost Abstractions and Undefined Behavior

Exceptions

A not-quite-zero cost abstraction

void operation_1();
void operation_2();
void operation_3() noexcept;

int main(){
  operation_1();
  operation_2();
  operation_3();
}

What are the rules about where exceptions can occur?

Pretty much anywhere!

 

(In C++17, functions labeled 'noexcept' cannot throw)

How should we implement exceptions?

The compiler somehow needs to insert extra code into the compiled program to implement exceptions

Exactly what code it inserts will depend on how we implement

A First Attempt

Just check every instruction!

int main(){
  try{ 
    op1();
  }catch(Exception& e){ 
    handler1(e);
  }
  
  try{
    op2();
  }
  catch(Exception& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
  
  op3();
}
Execption_Structure x;

int main(){
  op1();
  if(x.exception_happened){
    handler1(x);
  }
  
  op2();
  if(x.exception_happened){
    handler2(x);
  }
  
  op3();
  if(x.exception_happened){
    terminate();
  }
}

Runtime cost

Compile time cost

Code Complexity Cost

Yes: we have to insert all these additional exception checks--we may also want to optimize by trying to remove some checks (which could be costly!)

In source code? No. In binary code? Oh hell yes. You won't be able to tell what the code is doing underneath all those branches!

Exception Handling

Do we have to pay a cost even if we don't actually throw/catch any exceptions?

Yes.  In the worst case, we have to insert a branch every other instruction, which at least doubles the runtime of the code

C++ requires that an exception triggers!

Even though we're not catching exceptions, we still have to include these branches, because we cannot ignore any exceptions.

int main(){
  try{ 
    op1();
  }catch(Exception& e){ 
    handler1(e);
  }
  
  try{
    op2();
  }
  catch(Exception& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
  
  op3();
}
Execption_Structure x;

int main(){
  op1();
  if(x.exception_happened){
    handler1(x);
  }
  
  op2();
  if(x.exception_happened){
    handler2(x);
  }
  
  op3();
  if(x.exception_happened){
    terminate();
  }
}

Exceptions

Now do it again, but properly this time!

Goals

We would like an exception handling framework that is:

  • Fast in the case where no exception is thrown
  • Not excessively slow when an exception is actually thrown

But first...a warning!

We are about to enter an area of C++ that is very implementation-dependent and often undocumented!

The interfaces used for exception handling are defined not by the C++ Standard or the API, but the ABI. This means that every compiler could potentially implement its own exception techniques

The implementation we will study is based on x86 and GCC, documented partially on this post.

There is no guarantee that your compiler implements things the same way!

General Idea

Instead of checking if an exception occurred at every instruction, we should have some routine which runs when an exception is thrown.

 

This routine will be responsible for executing the exception.

operation_1();
if(exception){
  handle();
}
operation_2();
if(exception){
  handle();
}
void operation_1(){
  if(bad_thing){
    __cxa_throw();
  }
}

void operation_2(){
  if(bad_thing){
    __cxa_throw();
  }
}

Before

After

But there's a problem...

How does the exception executor know e.g. whether it's been invoked inside of a try-catch block? How does it know which catch to use?

void operation1(){
  if(bad_thing){
    __cxa_throw();
  }
}

void operation2(){
  if(bad_thing){
    __cxa_throw();
  }
}
int main(){
  try{ 
    op1();
  }catch(Exception& e){ 
    handler1(e);
  }
  
  try{
    op2();
  }
  catch(Exception& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
  
  op3();
}

Handle exception? Call terminate?

Solution: Record state!

At the start of a catch block, call __cxa_begin_catch and call __cxa_end_catch at the end--this will install information in some global area about what exception handlers are available at the time.

int main(){
  __cxa_begin_catch(handler1);
  op1();
  __cxa__end_catch(handler1);
  
  __cxa_begin_catch(handler2);
  op2();
  __cxa__end_catch(handler2);
  
  op3();
}

int main(){
  try{ 
    op1();
  }catch(Exception& e){ 
    handler1(e);
  }
  
  try{
    op2();
  }
  catch(Exception& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
  
  op3();
}

State Records

The state records stored by __cxa_begin_catch can be stored in two different locations:

  • ​In a global table
  • In the stack itself

GCC on x86 platforms uses the former, variants on ARM use the latter. The choice of location has a minor-to-moderate impact on runtime performance.

The state includes things like "which exception handlers are active", "where control for those handlers jumps to", and "active variables that need to be cleaned up."

What's the overall picture?

1. When we enter a try/catch block, we use __cxa_begin_catch() to record information about what to do if an exception triggers.

2. If an exception is triggered, __cxa_throw() will use this information to decide which exception handlers to run.

We've actually omitted about 12 steps here, but that should be enough for the basics

An Example

void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}

can catch: DumbException

resume execution at: handler2

destroy stack variables: none

can catch: SillyException

resume execution at: handler1

destroy stack variables: class1

Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}
Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}
Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}
Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}
Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}
Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1
DumbException handler2 class2 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}
Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1
DumbException handler2 class2 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}
Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1
DumbException handler2 class2 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}

op2 throws a SillyException!

Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1
DumbException handler2 class2 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}

op2 throws a SillyException!

We look through our handlers from innermost scope to outermost, trying to find a match. If a match is found, execute!

Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1
DumbException handler2 class2 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}

op2 throws a SillyException!

We look through our handlers from innermost scope to outermost, trying to find a match. If a match is found, execute!

Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1
DumbException handler2 class2 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}

op2 throws a SillyException!

We look through our handlers from innermost scope to outermost, trying to find a match. If a match is found, execute!

Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1
DumbException handler2 class2 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}

op2 throws a SillyException!

I found a match! We need to execute the cleanup routines of all blocks below us (destroy class2 + class1), then jump to the handler.

Exception Type Resume At Destroy Var
SillyException handler1 class1
DumbException handler2 class2 
void op1(){
  try{
    MyClass class2;
    op2();
  }catch (DumbException& e){
    handler2(e);
  }
}


int main(){
  try{
    MyClass class1;
    op1();
  }catch (SillyException& e){
    handler1(e);
  }
}

op2 throws a SillyException!

I found a match! We need to execute the cleanup routines of all blocks below us (destroy class2 + class1), then jump to the handler.

Is this zero-cost?

Runtime cost

Compile time cost

Code Complexity Cost

Very nearly. There is no visible cost if no exception is actually thrown...but the cleanup code occupies space in the instruction cache, potentially slowing down branches a little.

A small cost. We need to add some of the extra functions and cleanup information. 

A complexity cost to implementing the standard library. Otherwise, not an unthinkably large cost.

Do we pay if we don't actually catch any exceptions? (Throwing might happen anyways)

Is this zero-cost?

Could you write this better?

...depends on your error handling needs. If you don't need the full power of exceptions (arbitrary distance from throw to catch, pre-emption of executing code), you can probably do better.

Are C++ exceptions zero-cost?

No.

But they turn out to be useful enough in a variety of situations (and close enough to zero-cost) that they're worth including anyways.

Undefined Behavior

Recall from Lecture 1 that Undefined Behavior is triggered whenever any of the 193 conditions listed here occur.

 

(Actually, that's just in C. I don't know if anyone has ever tried to list all the UB conditions for C++ in one spot--there's a lot!)

What happens when UB is triggered?

Anything.

C++ did not spring into the world fully designed

Somebody thought long and hard about what should happen in certain cases, and came to the conclusion that the compiler should be allowed to do anything it wants to do!

Why did they come to this conclusion?

We'll look at three examples of UB to help us understand this a little better:

  • Shifting by more than a register width
  • Dereferencing a NULL pointer
  • Signed integer overflow

The fundamental answer is "speed"

Shift Width Overflow

In C++, shifting by more than the width of the register is undefined behavior.

int32_t x = 5;
x <<= 31; // Just fine!
x <<= 32; // Undefined!

By Thomas Nguyen - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=46809082

8086 Shift Instructions

The 8086 did not have hardware to carry out an arbitrary shift operation.

 

Instead, it would shift your register one position at a time, using one clock cycle per shift.

1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0

You could provide an 8-bit register as the shift amount.

8086 Shift Instructions

You could provide an 8-bit register as the shift amount.

So...you could shift up to 255 times, using 1 shift per clock cycle. Meaning one instruction could take 255 cycles.

Intel later realized this was a terrible idea, and every single x86 processor since then has masked shifts to the lower 5 bits (effectively putting a cap of 31 on the shift amount).

But now we have a problem!

Shifting too much?

int x = 173, y = 33;
x <<= y;
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

On 8086

On 80286

Shift Register

Mask

0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Shift Amount

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Final value of x

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0

Same Instruction, Different Outcome

Final value of x

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0

The same shift instruction results in different outcomes on different processors!

But wait, it gets worse!

 

Some CPUs treat anything greater than a 31-bit shift as a zero shift (not implementing masking like the 80286).

What can the compiler do?

There are only two things the compiler can do to mitigate this:

Check the result of every shift operation for overshifts, and insert fixup code if this occurs.

 

Pros:

  • Consistent behavior across platforms

Cons:

  • Very, very slow, with no opportunity to improve performance

Declare that if you shift by too much, you're on your own.

 

 

Pros:

  • Speedy!

Cons:

  • Inconsistent

NULL Pointer Dereference

Dereferencing a NULL pointer in C++ is not guaranteed to result in a segfault!

NULL Pointer Defererence

What happens when you dereference the pointer referring to address 0 on different CPUs?

Architecture Behavior
x86-64, 64-bit mode Illegal Page Fault (segfault)
x86-64, real mode Completely legal!
PDP-11 Always contains value zero.
Other CPUs Access memory-mapped I/O

...but NULL doesn't even have to be zero! The standard just defines it as a pointer which is "different from a pointer to any object or function"

What can the compiler do?

We really only have two choices here:

 

  • Check the value of every pointer to see if it is NULL on every single access.
  • Declare that we don't know what happens if you dereference NULL.

Integer Overflow

Integer overflow doesn't behave the same on all CPUs.

Most CPUs use twos-complement.

 

Some use ones-complement.

 

That one wacky Russian ternary computer doesn't even use binary representations.

Either have to do runtime checks or declare behavior to be undefined

Optimizing on Integer Overflow UB

The "as-if" rule

A C++ compiler may transform the program in any way it likes, including ways that break the rules of the standard, as long as all observable behavior of the program is as if the rules were obeyed.

int x = foo();
if (x > 0) {
  int y = x + 5;
  int z = y / 4;
}

Optimizing Division

Division is slow!

What we'd like to be able to do: optimize division statements into bitshifts

int x = foo();
int y = x + 5;
int z = y / 4;
int x = foo();
int y = x + 5;
int z = y >> 2;

Is this legal?

NO!

-1 >> 2 == 4611686018427387903

int x = foo();
if (x > 0){
  int y = x + 5;
  int z = y / 4;
}
int x = foo();
if (x > 0){
  int y = x + 5;
  int z = y >> 2;
}

Is this legal?

Compiler Reasoning:

  • At start of if-statement, x is in the range [1, INT_MAX]
  • That means y is in the range [6, INT_MAX]  (???)
  • So y is positive on line 4, so we can do the transformation
int x = foo();
if (x > 0){
  int y = x + 5;
  int z = y / 4;
}
int x = foo();
if (x > 0){
  int y = x + 5;
  int z = y >> 2;
}

Is this legal?

Compiler Reasoning:

  • At start of if-statement, x is in the range [1, INT_MAX]
  • That means y is in the range [6, INT_MAX]
  • So y is positive on line 4, so we can do the transformation

Is this a valid assumption?

 

  • If x + 5 does not overflow, then it is valid.
  • If x + 5 does overflow, then UB and the program is undefined!

Summary

Reminder: Project 2 Due on 12/4

Most of the difficulty of the project is in prime(), hamming(), and pi(), so try to have the other functions (particularly map, filter, and chain) working before leaving for break!

This is the Wednesday after we get back!

(changed from the original date of Monday after Thanksgiving)

Reminder: Bonus Lecture Poll

Will close sometime after 6:30pm today.

Currently on Piazza.

Notecards

Name and EID

One thing you learned today (can be "nothing")

One question you have about the material. If you leave this blank, you will be docked points.

If you do not want your question to be put on Piazza, please write the letters NPZ and circle them.

Additional Reading

  • https://www.includehelp.com/embedded-system/shift-and-rotate-instructions-in-8086-microprocessor.aspx                   
  • https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6793262/why-dereferencing-a-null-pointer-is-undefined-behaviour
  • https://kristerw.blogspot.com/2016/02/how-undefined-signed-overflow-enables.htmlhttps://stackoverflow.com/questions/15718262/what-exactly-is-the-as-if-rule
  • https://nullprogram.com/blog/2018/07/20

CS105C: Lecture 11

By Kevin Song

CS105C: Lecture 11

Why does UB exist?

  • 371

More from Kevin Song