- Feature Name:
simd_ffi
- Start Date: 2018-10-12
- RFC PR: rust-lang/rfcs#2574
- Rust Issue: rust-lang/rust#63068
Summary
This RFC allows using SIMD types in C FFI.
Motivation
The architecture-specific SIMD types provided in core::arch
cannot currently
be used in C FFI. That is, Rust programs cannot interface with C libraries that
use these in their APIs.
One notable example would be calling into vectorized libm
implementations
like sleef
, libmvec
, or Intel’s SVML
. The packed_simd
crate
relies on C FFI with these fundamental libraries to offer competitive
performance.
Why is using SIMD vectors in C FFI currently disallowed?
Consider the following example (playground):
extern "C" fn foo(x: __m256);
fn main() {
unsafe {
union U { v: __m256, a: [u64; 4] }
foo(U { a: [0; 4] }.v);
}
}
In this example, a 256-bit wide vector type, __m256
, is passed to an extern "C"
function via C FFI. Is the behavior of passing __m256
to the C function
defined?
That depends on both the platform and how the Rust program was compiled!
First, let’s make the platform concrete and assume that it follows the x64 SysV ABI which states:
3.2.1 Registers and the Stack Frame
Intel AVX (Advanced Vector Extensions) provides 16 256-bit wide AVX registers (
%ymm0
-%ymm15
). The lower 128-bits of%ymm0
-%ymm15
are aliased to the respective 128b-bit SSE registers (%xmm0
-%xmm15
). For purposes of parameter passing and function return,%xmmN
and%ymmN
refer to the same register. Only one of them can be used at the same time.3.2.3 Parameter Passing
SSE The class consists of types that fit into a vector register.
SSEUP The class consists of types that fit into a vector register and can be passed and returned in the upper bytes of it.
Second, in C
, the __m256
type is only available if the current translation
unit is being compiled with AVX
enabled.
Back to the example: __m256
is a 256-bit wide vector type, that is, wider than
128-bit, but it can be passed through a vector register using the lower and
upper 128-bits of a 256-bit wide register, and in C, if __m256
can be used,
these registers are always available.
That is, the C ABI requires two things:
- that Rust passes
__m256
via a 256-bit wide register - that
foo
has the#[target_feature(enable = "avx")]
attribute !
And this is where things went wrong: in Rust, __m256
is always available
independently of whether AVX
is available or not1,
but we haven’t specified how we are actually compiling our Rust program above:
-
if we compile it with
AVX
globally enabled, e.g., via-C target-feature=+avx
, then the behavior of callingfoo
is defined because__m256
will be passed to C in a single 256-bit wide register, which is what the C ABI requires. -
if we compile our program without
AVX
enabled, then the Rust program cannot use 256-bit wide registers because they are not available, so independently of how__m256
will be passed to C, it won’t be passed in a 256-bit wide register, and the behavior is undefined because of an ABI mismatch.
1: its layout is currently unspecified but that is not relevant for this issue - what matters is that 256-bit registers are not available and therefore they cannot be used.
You might be wondering: why is __m256
available even if AVX
is not
available? The reason is that we want to use __m256
in some parts of
Rust’s programs even if AVX
is not globally enabled, and currently we don’t
have great infrastructure for conditionally allowing it in some parts of the
program and not others.
Ideally, one should only be able to use __m256
and operations on it if AVX
is available, and this is exactly what this RFC proposes for using vector types
in C FFI: to always require #[target_feature(enable = X)]
in C FFI functions
using SIMD types, where “unblocking” the use of each type requires some
particular feature to be enabled, e.g., avx
or avx2
in the case of __m256
.
That is, the compiler would reject the example above with an error:
error[E1337]: `__m256` on C FFI requires `#[target_feature(enable = "avx")]`
--> src/main.rs:7:15
|
7 | fn foo(x: __m256) -> __m256;
| ^^^^^^
And the following program would always have defined behavior (playground):
#[target_feature(enable = "avx")]
extern "C" fn foo(x: __m256) -> __m256;
fn main() {
unsafe {
#[repr(C)] union U { v: __m256, a: [u64; 4] }
if is_x86_feature_detected!("avx") {
// note: this operation is used here for readability
// but its behavior is currently unspecified (see note above).
let vec = U { a: [0; 4] }.v;
foo(vec);
}
}
}
independently of the -C target-feature
s used globally to compile the whole
binary. Note that:
extern "C" foo
is compiled withAVX
enabled, sofoo
takes an__m256
like the C ABI expects- the call to
foo
is guarded with anis_x86_feature_detected
, that is,foo
will only be called ifAVX
is available at run-time - if the Rust calling convention differs from the calling convention of the
extern
function, Rust has to adapt these.
Guide-level and reference-level explanation
Architecture-specific vector types require #[target_feature]
s to be FFI safe.
That is, they are only safely usable as part of the signature of extern
functions if the function has certain #[target_feature]
s enabled.
Which #[target_feature]
s must be enabled depends on the vector types being
used.
For the stable architecture-specific vector types the following target features must be enabled:
x86
/x86_64
:__m128
,__m128i
,__m128d
:"sse"
__m256
,__m256i
,__m256d
:"avx"
Future stabilizations of architecture-specific vector types must specify the
target features required to use them in extern
functions.
Drawbacks
None.
Rationale and alternatives
This is an adhoc solution to the problem, but sufficient for FFI purposes.
Future architecture-specific vector types
In the future, we might want to stabilize some of the following vector types. This section explores which target features would they require:
x86
/x86_64
:__m64
:mmx
__m512
,__m512i
,__m512f
: “avx512f”
arm
:neon
aarch64
:neon
ppc64
:altivec
/vsx
wasm32
:simd128
Require the feature to be enabled globally for the binary
Instead of using #[target_feature]
we could allow vector types on C FFI only
behind #[cfg(target_feature)]
, e.g., via something like the portability check.
This would not allow calling C FFI functions with vector types conditionally on, e.g., run-time feature detection.
Prior art
In C, the architecture specific vector types are only available if the required target features are enabled at compile-time.
Unresolved questions
- Should it be possible to use, e.g.,
__m128
on C FFI when theavx
feature is enabled? Does that change the calling convention and make doing so unsafe ? We could extend this RFC to also require that to use certain types certain features must be disabled.