c# - 为什么运算符比方法调用慢得多？ (结构仅在较旧的 JIT 上较慢)

Question

简介:我用 C# 编写高性能代码。是的，我知道 C++ 会给我更好的优化，但我仍然选择使用 C#。我不想辩论那个选择。相反，我想听听像我一样尝试在 .NET Framework 上编写高性能代码的人的意见。

问题:

• 为什么下面代码中的运算符比等价的运算符慢方法调用??
• 为什么方法在下面的代码中传递了两个 double 值比传递具有两个结构的等效方法更快 double 里面？ (A:较旧的 JIT 优化结构很差)
• 有没有办法让 .NET JIT 编译器处理简单结构与结构成员一样高效？ (A:获得更新的 JIT)

我认为我知道的:最初的 .NET JIT 编译器不会内联任何涉及结构的内容。 Bizarre given structs 只应该用在你需要像内置函数一样优化的小值类型的地方，但这是真的。幸运的是，在 .NET 3.5SP1 和 .NET 2.0SP2 中，他们对 JIT 优化器进行了一些改进，包括对内联的改进，特别是对于结构。 (我猜他们这样做是因为否则他们引入的新 Complex 结构会执行得非常糟糕......所以 Complex 团队可能会抨击 JIT Optimizer 团队。)因此，.NET 3.5 SP1 之前的任何文档都可能是与这个问题不太相关。

我的测试显示:我已经通过检查 C:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\mscorwks.dll 文件确实有版本 >= 3053 来验证我确实有更新的 JIT 优化器，因此应该对 JIT 优化器进行这些改进。然而，即便如此，我的时间安排和对反汇编的看法都是:

JIT 生成的用于传递具有两个 double 的结构的代码的效率远低于直接传递两个 double 的代码。

与将结构作为参数传递相比，JIT 生成的结构方法代码传入“this”的效率要高得多。

如果您传递两个 double 而不是传递一个具有两个 double 的结构，那么 JIT 仍然可以更好地内联，即使由于明显处于循环中而使用乘数也是如此。

时机:实际上，通过反汇编，我意识到循环中的大部分时间只是访问 List 之外的测试数据。如果将循环的开销代码和数据访问因素排除在外，进行相同调用的四种方式之间的区别就会大不相同。通过执行 PlusEqual(double, double) 而不是 PlusEqual(Element)，我获得了 5 到 20 倍的加速。执行 PlusEqual(double, double) 而不是运算符 += 是 10 到 40 倍。哇。伤心。

这是一组时间安排:

Populating List<Element> took 320ms.
The PlusEqual() method took 105ms.
The 'same' += operator took 131ms.
The 'same' -= operator took 139ms.
The PlusEqual(double, double) method took 68ms.
The do nothing loop took 66ms.
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 124%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 132%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 64%.
If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List...
The ratio of operator with constructor to method is 166%.
The ratio of operator without constructor to method is 187%.
The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is 5%.

代码:

namespace OperatorVsMethod
{
  public struct Element
  {
    public double Left;
    public double Right;

    public Element(double left, double right)
    {
      this.Left = left;
      this.Right = right;
    }

    public static Element operator +(Element x, Element y)
    {
      return new Element(x.Left + y.Left, x.Right + y.Right);
    }

    public static Element operator -(Element x, Element y)
    {
      x.Left += y.Left;
      x.Right += y.Right;
      return x;
    }    

    /// <summary>
    /// Like the += operator; but faster.
    /// </summary>
    public void PlusEqual(Element that)
    {
      this.Left += that.Left;
      this.Right += that.Right;
    }    

    /// <summary>
    /// Like the += operator; but faster.
    /// </summary>
    public void PlusEqual(double thatLeft, double thatRight)
    {
      this.Left += thatLeft;
      this.Right += thatRight;
    }    
  }    

  [TestClass]
  public class UnitTest1
  {
    [TestMethod]
    public void TestMethod1()
    {
      Stopwatch stopwatch = new Stopwatch();

      // Populate a List of Elements to multiply together
      int seedSize = 4;
      List<double> doubles = new List<double>(seedSize);
      doubles.Add(2.5d);
      doubles.Add(100000d);
      doubles.Add(-0.5d);
      doubles.Add(-100002d);

      int size = 2500000 * seedSize;
      List<Element> elts = new List<Element>(size);

      stopwatch.Reset();
      stopwatch.Start();
      for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
      {
        int di = ii % seedSize;
        double d = doubles[di];
        elts.Add(new Element(d, d));
      }
      stopwatch.Stop();
      long populateMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;

      // Measure speed of += operator (calls ctor)
      Element operatorCtorResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
      stopwatch.Reset();
      stopwatch.Start();
      for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
      {
        operatorCtorResult += elts[ii];
      }
      stopwatch.Stop();
      long operatorCtorMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;

      // Measure speed of -= operator (+= without ctor)
      Element operatorNoCtorResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
      stopwatch.Reset();
      stopwatch.Start();
      for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
      {
        operatorNoCtorResult -= elts[ii];
      }
      stopwatch.Stop();
      long operatorNoCtorMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;

      // Measure speed of PlusEqual(Element) method
      Element plusEqualResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
      stopwatch.Reset();
      stopwatch.Start();
      for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
      {
        plusEqualResult.PlusEqual(elts[ii]);
      }
      stopwatch.Stop();
      long plusEqualMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;

      // Measure speed of PlusEqual(double, double) method
      Element plusEqualDDResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
      stopwatch.Reset();
      stopwatch.Start();
      for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
      {
        Element elt = elts[ii];
        plusEqualDDResult.PlusEqual(elt.Left, elt.Right);
      }
      stopwatch.Stop();
      long plusEqualDDMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;

      // Measure speed of doing nothing but accessing the Element
      Element doNothingResult = new Element(1d, 1d);
      stopwatch.Reset();
      stopwatch.Start();
      for (int ii = 0; ii < size; ++ii)
      {
        Element elt = elts[ii];
        double left = elt.Left;
        double right = elt.Right;
      }
      stopwatch.Stop();
      long doNothingMS = stopwatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;

      // Report results
      Assert.AreEqual(1d, operatorCtorResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
      Assert.AreEqual(1d, operatorNoCtorResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
      Assert.AreEqual(1d, plusEqualResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
      Assert.AreEqual(1d, plusEqualDDResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");
      Assert.AreEqual(1d, doNothingResult.Left, "The operator += did not compute the right result!");

      // Report speeds
      Console.WriteLine("Populating List<Element> took {0}ms.", populateMS);
      Console.WriteLine("The PlusEqual() method took {0}ms.", plusEqualMS);
      Console.WriteLine("The 'same' += operator took {0}ms.", operatorCtorMS);
      Console.WriteLine("The 'same' -= operator took {0}ms.", operatorNoCtorMS);
      Console.WriteLine("The PlusEqual(double, double) method took {0}ms.", plusEqualDDMS);
      Console.WriteLine("The do nothing loop took {0}ms.", doNothingMS);

      // Compare speeds
      long percentageRatio = 100L * operatorCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
      Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator with constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
      percentageRatio = 100L * operatorNoCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
      Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator without constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
      percentageRatio = 100L * plusEqualDDMS / plusEqualMS;
      Console.WriteLine("The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is {0}%.", percentageRatio);

      operatorCtorMS -= doNothingMS;
      operatorNoCtorMS -= doNothingMS;
      plusEqualMS -= doNothingMS;
      plusEqualDDMS -= doNothingMS;
      Console.WriteLine("If we remove the overhead time for the loop accessing the elements from the List...");
      percentageRatio = 100L * operatorCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
      Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator with constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
      percentageRatio = 100L * operatorNoCtorMS / plusEqualMS;
      Console.WriteLine("The ratio of operator without constructor to method is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
      percentageRatio = 100L * plusEqualDDMS / plusEqualMS;
      Console.WriteLine("The ratio of PlusEqual(double,double) to PlusEqual(Element) is {0}%.", percentageRatio);
    }
  }
}

IL:(也就是上面的一些被编译成的)

public void PlusEqual(Element that)
    {
00000000 push    ebp 
00000001 mov     ebp,esp 
00000003 push    edi 
00000004 push    esi 
00000005 push    ebx 
00000006 sub     esp,30h 
00000009 xor     eax,eax 
0000000b mov     dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax 
0000000e xor     eax,eax 
00000010 mov     dword ptr [ebp-1Ch],eax 
00000013 mov     dword ptr [ebp-3Ch],ecx 
00000016 cmp     dword ptr ds:[04C87B7Ch],0 
0000001d je     00000024 
0000001f call    753081B1 
00000024 nop       
      this.Left += that.Left;
00000025 mov     eax,dword ptr [ebp-3Ch] 
00000028 fld     qword ptr [ebp+8] 
0000002b fadd    qword ptr [eax] 
0000002d fstp    qword ptr [eax] 
      this.Right += that.Right;
0000002f mov     eax,dword ptr [ebp-3Ch] 
00000032 fld     qword ptr [ebp+10h] 
00000035 fadd    qword ptr [eax+8] 
00000038 fstp    qword ptr [eax+8] 
    }
0000003b nop       
0000003c lea     esp,[ebp-0Ch] 
0000003f pop     ebx 
00000040 pop     esi 
00000041 pop     edi 
00000042 pop     ebp 
00000043 ret     10h 
 public void PlusEqual(double thatLeft, double thatRight)
    {
00000000 push    ebp 
00000001 mov     ebp,esp 
00000003 push    edi 
00000004 push    esi 
00000005 push    ebx 
00000006 sub     esp,30h 
00000009 xor     eax,eax 
0000000b mov     dword ptr [ebp-10h],eax 
0000000e xor     eax,eax 
00000010 mov     dword ptr [ebp-1Ch],eax 
00000013 mov     dword ptr [ebp-3Ch],ecx 
00000016 cmp     dword ptr ds:[04C87B7Ch],0 
0000001d je     00000024 
0000001f call    75308159 
00000024 nop       
      this.Left += thatLeft;
00000025 mov     eax,dword ptr [ebp-3Ch] 
00000028 fld     qword ptr [ebp+10h] 
0000002b fadd    qword ptr [eax] 
0000002d fstp    qword ptr [eax] 
      this.Right += thatRight;
0000002f mov     eax,dword ptr [ebp-3Ch] 
00000032 fld     qword ptr [ebp+8] 
00000035 fadd    qword ptr [eax+8] 
00000038 fstp    qword ptr [eax+8] 
    }
0000003b nop       
0000003c lea     esp,[ebp-0Ch] 
0000003f pop     ebx 
00000040 pop     esi 
00000041 pop     edi 
00000042 pop     ebp 
00000043 ret     10h 

Answer 1

我得到了非常不同的结果，更不那么引人注目了。但没有使用测试运行器，我将代码粘贴到控制台模式应用程序中。当我尝试时，5% 的结果在 32 位模式下约为 87%，在 64 位模式下约为 100%。

对齐对于 double 至关重要，.NET 运行时只能 promise 在 32 位机器上对齐 4。在我看来，测试运行程序正在使用与 4 而不是 8 对齐的堆栈地址开始测试方法。当 double 跨越高速缓存行边界时，未对齐惩罚变得非常大。