* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-08-25 9:56 ` marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-08-25 10:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: marxin at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-08-25 9:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
Martin Liška <marxin at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever confirmed|0 |1
Last reconfirmed| |2021-08-25
Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW
CC| |marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-08-25 9:56 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102058] " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-08-25 10:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-08-26 9:59 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-08-25 10:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
--- Comment #1 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Created attachment 51355
--> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=51355&action=edit
patch to add --param vect-emulated-gather for debugging
When using attached patch then 0 vs. 1 on zen2 indeed reproduces
Estimated Estimated
Base Base Base Peak Peak Peak
Benchmarks Ref. Run Time Ratio Ref. Run Time Ratio
-------------- ------ --------- --------- ------ --------- ---------
450.soplex 8340 120 69.5 * 8340 136 61.4 *
trying to nail it down now.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-08-25 9:56 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102058] " marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-08-25 10:00 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-08-26 9:59 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-10-29 13:05 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12 regression] " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-08-26 9:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
--- Comment #2 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
perf isn't particularly helpful, pointing at differences where no differences
in assembly occurs. But we do now vectorize soplex::SPxSteepPR::entered4, in
particular soplex::Vector::operator* which is
/// inner product.
Real operator*(const Vector& w) const
{
Real x = 0;
int n = size();
Element* e = m_elem;
while (n--)
{
x += e->val * w[e->idx];
e++;
}
return x;
}
and the e->val * w[e->idx] contains the gather we now handle.
Other parts perf points out are once again not vectorized :/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12 regression] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2021-08-26 9:59 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-10-29 13:05 ` hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
2021-11-02 6:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-10-29 13:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
Summary|450.soplex regressed on |[12 regression] 450.soplex
|x86_64 with -Ofast |regressed on x86_64 with
|-march=generic (by 8-15%) |-Ofast -march=generic (by
| |8-15%)
--- Comment #3 from Jan Hubicka <hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
This still shows comparing trunk to gcc11 on lnt, so marking as regression
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12 regression] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2021-10-29 13:05 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12 regression] " hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2021-11-02 6:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-20 10:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2021-11-02 6:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|--- |12.0
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12 regression] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2021-11-02 6:52 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-01-20 10:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-02-10 10:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
` (3 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-01-20 10:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
--- Comment #4 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It's all with generic arch/tune but -Ofast which is not the most interesting
combination. But we should see to extract a testcase for the reduction
and see to gather runtime data on the size() distribution. When
vectorized the loop might also turn from nice small to slightly too big
for efficient cross iteration OOO scheduling.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12 regression] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (5 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-20 10:33 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-02-10 10:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-05-06 8:30 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12/13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
` (2 subsequent siblings)
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-02-10 10:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
--- Comment #5 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
It was observed that 450.soplex needs more iterations to converge. As we now
vectorize a reduction that we didn't before that's definitely a thing that can
impact precision with FP. But this is expected with -Ofast.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12/13 regression] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (6 preceding siblings ...)
2022-02-10 10:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-05-06 8:30 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-07-26 13:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-08 12:22 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-05-06 8:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|12.0 |12.2
--- Comment #6 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 12.1 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 12.2.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12/13 regression] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (7 preceding siblings ...)
2022-05-06 8:30 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12/13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2022-07-26 13:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-08 12:22 ` [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2022-07-26 13:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Status|NEW |SUSPENDED
--- Comment #7 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
See comment#5
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread
* [Bug tree-optimization/102058] [12/13/14 regression] 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%)
2021-08-25 8:41 [Bug tree-optimization/102058] New: 450.soplex regressed on x86_64 with -Ofast -march=generic (by 8-15%) jamborm at gcc dot gnu.org
` (8 preceding siblings ...)
2022-07-26 13:30 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
@ 2023-05-08 12:22 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
9 siblings, 0 replies; 11+ messages in thread
From: rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org @ 2023-05-08 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: gcc-bugs
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=102058
Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Target Milestone|12.3 |12.4
--- Comment #9 from Richard Biener <rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
GCC 12.3 is being released, retargeting bugs to GCC 12.4.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 11+ messages in thread