Nothing reads or writes this data yet, but we do implement the
memory management that allows both unknown field data and extensions
to grow within the same pseudo-arena in a message. By making both
arrays grow towards each other, we avoid the need to reallocate them
separately.
The primary motivation for this change is to avoid referring to the
`upb_msglayout` object when we are trying to fetch the `upb_msglayout`
object for a sub-message. This will help pave the way for parsing
extensions. We also implement several optimizations so that we can
make this change without regressing performance.
Normally we compute the layout for a sub-message field like so:
```
const upb_msglayout *get_submsg_layout(
const upb_msglayout *layout,
const upb_msglayout_field *field) {
return layout->submsgs[field->submsg_index]
}
```
The reason for this indirection is to avoid storing a pointer directly
in `upb_msglayout_field`, as this would double its size (from 12 to 24
bytes on 64-bit architectures) which is wasteful as this pointer is
only needed for message typed fields.
However `get_submsg_layout` as written above does not work for
extensions, as they will not have entries in the message's
`layout->submsgs` array by nature, and we want to avoid creating
an entire fake `upb_msglayout` for each such extension since that
would also be wasteful.
This change removes the dependency on `upb_msglayout` by passing down
the `submsgs` array instead:
```
const upb_msglayout *get_submsg_layout(
const upb_msglayout *const *submsgs,
const upb_msglayout_field *field) {
return submsgs[field->submsg_index]
}
```
This will pave the way for parsing extensions, as we can more easily
create an alternative `submsgs` array for extension fields without
extra overhead or waste.
Along the way several optimizations presented themselves that allow
a nice increase in performance:
1. Passing the parsed `wireval` by address instead of by value ended
up avoiding an expensive and useless stack copy (this is on Clang,
which was used for all measurements).
2. When field numbers are densely packed, we can find a field by number
with a single indexed lookup instead of linear search. At codegen
time we can compute the maximum field number that will allow such
an indexed lookup.
3. For fields that do require linear search, we can start the linear
search at the location where we found the previous field, taking
advantage of the fact that field numbers are generally increasing.
4. When the hasbit index is less than 32 (the common case) we can use
a less expensive code sequence to set it.
5. We check for the hasbit case before the oneof case, as optional
fields are more common than oneof fields.
Benchmark results indicate a 20% improvement in parse speed with a
small code size increase:
```
name old time/op new time/op delta
ArenaOneAlloc 21.3ns ± 0% 21.5ns ± 0% +0.96% (p=0.000 n=12+12)
ArenaInitialBlockOneAlloc 6.32ns ± 0% 6.32ns ± 0% +0.03% (p=0.000 n=12+10)
LoadDescriptor_Upb 53.5µs ± 1% 51.5µs ± 2% -3.70% (p=0.000 n=12+12)
LoadAdsDescriptor_Upb 2.78ms ± 2% 2.68ms ± 0% -3.57% (p=0.000 n=12+12)
LoadDescriptor_Proto2 240µs ± 0% 240µs ± 0% +0.12% (p=0.001 n=12+12)
LoadAdsDescriptor_Proto2 12.8ms ± 0% 12.7ms ± 0% -1.15% (p=0.000 n=12+10)
Parse_Upb_FileDesc<UseArena,Copy> 13.2µs ± 2% 10.7µs ± 0% -18.49% (p=0.000 n=10+12)
Parse_Upb_FileDesc<UseArena,Alias> 11.3µs ± 0% 9.6µs ± 0% -15.11% (p=0.000 n=12+11)
Parse_Upb_FileDesc<InitBlock,Copy> 12.7µs ± 0% 10.3µs ± 0% -19.00% (p=0.000 n=10+12)
Parse_Upb_FileDesc<InitBlock,Alias> 10.9µs ± 0% 9.2µs ± 0% -15.82% (p=0.000 n=12+12)
Parse_Proto2<FileDesc,NoArena,Copy> 29.4µs ± 0% 29.5µs ± 0% +0.61% (p=0.000 n=12+12)
Parse_Proto2<FileDesc,UseArena,Copy> 20.7µs ± 2% 20.6µs ± 2% ~ (p=0.260 n=12+11)
Parse_Proto2<FileDesc,InitBlock,Copy> 16.7µs ± 1% 16.7µs ± 0% -0.25% (p=0.036 n=12+10)
Parse_Proto2<FileDescSV,InitBlock,Alias> 16.5µs ± 0% 16.5µs ± 0% +0.20% (p=0.016 n=12+11)
SerializeDescriptor_Proto2 5.30µs ± 1% 5.36µs ± 1% +1.09% (p=0.000 n=12+11)
SerializeDescriptor_Upb 12.9µs ± 0% 13.0µs ± 0% +0.90% (p=0.000 n=12+11)
FILE SIZE VM SIZE
-------------- --------------
+1.5% +176 +1.6% +176 upb/decode.c
+1.8% +176 +1.9% +176 decode_msg
+0.4% +64 +0.4% +64 upb/def.c
+1.4% +64 +1.4% +64 _upb_symtab_addfile
+1.2% +48 +1.4% +48 upb/reflection.c
+15% +32 +18% +32 upb_msg_set
+2.9% +16 +3.1% +16 upb_msg_mutable
-9.3% -288 [ = ] 0 [Unmapped]
[ = ] 0 +0.2% +288 TOTAL
```
This brings upb into line with C++. PHP already checks this
internally, so this should not be an issue there. Ruby on the
other hand does not currently check this, so this change will
cause our Ruby implementation to reject some programs that
would otherwise have been accepted.
"No such field:" is more clear than "Unknown field:",
because "unknown field" is a term of art within protocol
buffers that implies that we are preserving the field.
Also "No such field:" matches the pre-existing Ruby
error message.
Joshua Haberman
Matt Kulukundis