1
0
Fork 0
stockfish/src/thread.cpp

267 lines
7.5 KiB
C++
Raw Normal View History

/*
Stockfish, a UCI chess playing engine derived from Glaurung 2.1
Copyright (C) 2004-2021 The Stockfish developers (see AUTHORS file)
Stockfish is free software: you can redistribute it and/or modify
it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
the Free Software Foundation, either version 3 of the License, or
(at your option) any later version.
Stockfish is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
GNU General Public License for more details.
You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>.
*/
2012-01-16 13:20:13 -07:00
#include <cassert>
#include <algorithm> // For std::count
#include "movegen.h"
#include "search.h"
#include "thread.h"
#include "uci.h"
#include "syzygy/tbprobe.h"
#include "tt.h"
namespace Stockfish {
ThreadPool Threads; // Global object
/// Thread constructor launches the thread and waits until it goes to sleep
/// in idle_loop(). Note that 'searching' and 'exit' should be already set.
Thread::Thread(size_t n) : idx(n), stdThread(&Thread::idle_loop, this) {
wait_for_search_finished();
}
/// Thread destructor wakes up the thread in idle_loop() and waits
/// for its termination. Thread should be already waiting.
Thread::~Thread() {
assert(!searching);
exit = true;
start_searching();
stdThread.join();
}
/// Thread::clear() reset histories, usually before a new game
void Thread::clear() {
counterMoves.fill(MOVE_NONE);
mainHistory.fill(0);
lowPlyHistory.fill(0);
captureHistory.fill(0);
for (bool inCheck : { false, true })
for (StatsType c : { NoCaptures, Captures })
{
for (auto& to : continuationHistory[inCheck][c])
for (auto& h : to)
h->fill(0);
continuationHistory[inCheck][c][NO_PIECE][0]->fill(Search::CounterMovePruneThreshold - 1);
}
}
/// Thread::start_searching() wakes up the thread that will start the search
void Thread::start_searching() {
std::lock_guard<std::mutex> lk(mutex);
searching = true;
cv.notify_one(); // Wake up the thread in idle_loop()
}
/// Thread::wait_for_search_finished() blocks on the condition variable
/// until the thread has finished searching.
void Thread::wait_for_search_finished() {
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lk(mutex);
cv.wait(lk, [&]{ return !searching; });
}
/// Thread::idle_loop() is where the thread is parked, blocked on the
/// condition variable, when it has no work to do.
void Thread::idle_loop() {
// If OS already scheduled us on a different group than 0 then don't overwrite
// the choice, eventually we are one of many one-threaded processes running on
// some Windows NUMA hardware, for instance in fishtest. To make it simple,
// just check if running threads are below a threshold, in this case all this
// NUMA machinery is not needed.
if (Options["Threads"] > 8)
WinProcGroup::bindThisThread(idx);
while (true)
{
std::unique_lock<std::mutex> lk(mutex);
searching = false;
cv.notify_one(); // Wake up anyone waiting for search finished
cv.wait(lk, [&]{ return searching; });
if (exit)
return;
lk.unlock();
search();
}
}
/// ThreadPool::set() creates/destroys threads to match the requested number.
/// Created and launched threads will immediately go to sleep in idle_loop.
/// Upon resizing, threads are recreated to allow for binding if necessary.
void ThreadPool::set(size_t requested) {
if (size() > 0) // destroy any existing thread(s)
{
main()->wait_for_search_finished();
while (size() > 0)
delete back(), pop_back();
}
if (requested > 0) // create new thread(s)
{
push_back(new MainThread(0));
while (size() < requested)
push_back(new Thread(size()));
clear();
// Reallocate the hash with the new threadpool size
TT.resize(size_t(Options["Hash"]));
// Init thread number dependent search params.
Search::init();
}
}
/// ThreadPool::clear() sets threadPool data to initial values
void ThreadPool::clear() {
for (Thread* th : *this)
th->clear();
main()->callsCnt = 0;
main()->bestPreviousScore = VALUE_INFINITE;
main()->previousTimeReduction = 1.0;
}
/// ThreadPool::start_thinking() wakes up main thread waiting in idle_loop() and
/// returns immediately. Main thread will wake up other threads and start the search.
void ThreadPool::start_thinking(Position& pos, StateListPtr& states,
const Search::LimitsType& limits, bool ponderMode) {
main()->wait_for_search_finished();
main()->stopOnPonderhit = stop = false;
Smarter time management near stop limit This patch makes Stockfish search same depth again if > 60% of optimum time is already used, instead of trying the next iteration. The idea is that the next iteration will generally take about the same amount of time as has already been used in total. When we are likely to begin the last iteration, as judged by total time taken so far > 0.6 * optimum time, searching the last depth again instead of increasing the depth still helps the other threads in lazy SMP and prepares better move ordering for the next moves. STC : LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) {-1.00,3.00} Total: 13436 W: 2695 L: 2558 D: 8183 Ptnml(0-2): 222, 1538, 3087, 1611, 253 https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5e1618a761fe5f83a67dd964 LTC : LLR: 2.94 (-2.94,2.94) {0.00,2.00} Total: 32160 W: 4261 L: 4047 D: 23852 Ptnml(0-2): 211, 2988, 9448, 3135, 247 https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5e162ca061fe5f83a67dd96d The code was revised as suggested by @vondele for multithreading: STC (8 threads): LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) {0.00,2.00} Total: 16640 W: 2049 L: 1885 D: 12706 Ptnml(0-2): 119, 1369, 5158, 1557, 108 https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5e19826a2cc590e03c3c2f52 LTC (8 threads): LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) {-1.00,3.00} Total: 16536 W: 2758 L: 2629 D: 11149 Ptnml(0-2): 182, 1758, 4296, 1802, 224 https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/view/5e18b91a27dab692fcf9a140 Thanks to those discussing Stockfish lazy SMP on fishcooking which made me try this, and to @vondele for suggestions and doing related tests. See full discussion in the pull request thread: https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/2482 Bench: 4586187
2020-01-11 15:10:22 -07:00
increaseDepth = true;
main()->ponder = ponderMode;
Search::Limits = limits;
Search::RootMoves rootMoves;
for (const auto& m : MoveList<LEGAL>(pos))
if ( limits.searchmoves.empty()
|| std::count(limits.searchmoves.begin(), limits.searchmoves.end(), m))
rootMoves.emplace_back(m);
if (!rootMoves.empty())
Tablebases root ranking This patch corrects both MultiPV behaviour and "go searchmoves" behaviour for tablebases. We change the logic of table base probing at root positions from filtering to ranking. The ranking code is much more straightforward than the current filtering code (this is a simplification), and also more versatile. If the root is a TB position, each root move is probed and assigned a TB score and a TB rank. The TB score is the Value to be displayed to the user for that move (unless the search finds a mate score), while the TB rank determines which moves should appear higher in a multi-pv search. In game play, the engine will always pick a move with the highest rank. Ranks run from -1000 to +1000: 901 to 1000 : TB win 900 : normally a TB win, in rare cases this could be a draw 1 to 899 : cursed TB wins 0 : draw -1 to -899 : blessed TB losses -900 : normally a TB loss, in rare cases this could be a draw -901 to -1000 : TB loss Normally all winning moves get rank 1000 (to let the search pick the best among them). The exception is if there has been a first repetition. In that case, moves are ranked strictly by DTZ so that the engine will play a move that lowers DTZ (and therefore cannot repeat the position a second time). Losing moves get rank -1000 unless they have relatively high DTZ, meaning they have some drawing chances. Those get ranks towards -901 (when they cross -900 the draw is certain). Closes https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/1467 No functional change (without tablebases).
2018-04-18 10:38:38 -06:00
Tablebases::rank_root_moves(pos, rootMoves);
// After ownership transfer 'states' becomes empty, so if we stop the search
// and call 'go' again without setting a new position states.get() == NULL.
assert(states.get() || setupStates.get());
if (states.get())
setupStates = std::move(states); // Ownership transfer, states is now empty
// We use Position::set() to set root position across threads. But there are
// some StateInfo fields (previous, pliesFromNull, capturedPiece) that cannot
// be deduced from a fen string, so set() clears them and they are set from
// setupStates->back() later. The rootState is per thread, earlier states are shared
// since they are read-only.
for (Thread* th : *this)
{
th->nodes = th->tbHits = th->nmpMinPly = th->bestMoveChanges = 0;
Eliminate ONE_PLY Simplification that eliminates ONE_PLY, based on a suggestion in the forum that support for fractional plies has never been used, and @mcostalba's openness to the idea of eliminating it. We lose a little bit of type safety by making Depth an integer, but in return we simplify the code in search.cpp quite significantly. No functional change ------------------------------------------ The argument favoring eliminating ONE_PLY: * The term “ONE_PLY” comes up in a lot of forum posts (474 to date) https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!searchin/fishcooking/ONE_PLY%7Csort:relevance * There is occasionally a commit that breaks invariance of the code with respect to ONE_PLY https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!searchin/fishcooking/ONE_PLY%7Csort:date/fishcooking/ZIPdYj6k0fk/KdNGcPWeBgAJ * To prevent such commits, there is a Travis CI hack that doubles ONE_PLY and rechecks bench * Sustaining ONE_PLY has, alas, not resulted in any improvements to the engine, despite many individuals testing many experiments over 5 years. The strongest argument in favor of preserving ONE_PLY comes from @locutus: “If we use par example ONE_PLY=256 the parameter space is increases by the factor 256. So it seems very unlikely that the optimal setting is in the subspace of ONE_PLY=1.” There is a strong theoretical impediment to fractional depth systems: the transposition table uses depth to determine when a stored result is good enough to supply an answer for a current search. If you have fractional depths, then different pathways to the position can be at fractionally different depths. In the end, there are three separate times when a proposal to remove ONE_PLY was defeated by the suggestion to “give it a few more months.” So… it seems like time to remove this distraction from the community. See the pull request here: https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/pull/2289
2019-09-28 14:27:23 -06:00
th->rootDepth = th->completedDepth = 0;
th->rootMoves = rootMoves;
th->rootPos.set(pos.fen(), pos.is_chess960(), &th->rootState, th);
th->rootState = setupStates->back();
}
main()->start_searching();
}
Thread* ThreadPool::get_best_thread() const {
Thread* bestThread = front();
std::map<Move, int64_t> votes;
Value minScore = VALUE_NONE;
// Find minimum score of all threads
for (Thread* th: *this)
minScore = std::min(minScore, th->rootMoves[0].score);
// Vote according to score and depth, and select the best thread
for (Thread* th : *this)
{
votes[th->rootMoves[0].pv[0]] +=
(th->rootMoves[0].score - minScore + 14) * int(th->completedDepth);
if (abs(bestThread->rootMoves[0].score) >= VALUE_TB_WIN_IN_MAX_PLY)
{
// Make sure we pick the shortest mate / TB conversion or stave off mate the longest
if (th->rootMoves[0].score > bestThread->rootMoves[0].score)
bestThread = th;
}
else if ( th->rootMoves[0].score >= VALUE_TB_WIN_IN_MAX_PLY
|| ( th->rootMoves[0].score > VALUE_TB_LOSS_IN_MAX_PLY
&& votes[th->rootMoves[0].pv[0]] > votes[bestThread->rootMoves[0].pv[0]]))
bestThread = th;
}
return bestThread;
}
/// Start non-main threads
void ThreadPool::start_searching() {
for (Thread* th : *this)
if (th != front())
th->start_searching();
}
/// Wait for non-main threads
void ThreadPool::wait_for_search_finished() const {
for (Thread* th : *this)
if (th != front())
th->wait_for_search_finished();
}
} // namespace Stockfish