public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jakub at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug middle-end/104151] [9/10/11/12 Regression] x86: excessive code generated for 128-bit byteswap
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 12:20:08 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-104151-4-MOwSCsHREk@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-104151-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104151

Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jakub at gcc dot gnu.org

--- Comment #11 from Jakub Jelinek <jakub at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
With -O3 it regresses with
r7-2009-g8d4fc2d3d0c8f87bb3e182be1a618a511f8f9465
__uint128_t bswap(__uint128_t a) { return __builtin_bswap128 (a); }
emits the optimal code but is only in GCC 11.1 and later.

One fix for this might be to handle
  _8 = BIT_FIELD_REF <a_3(D), 64, 64>;
  _1 = __builtin_bswap64 (_8);
  y[0] = _1;
  _10 = BIT_FIELD_REF <a_3(D), 64, 0>;
  _2 = __builtin_bswap64 (_10);
  y[1] = _2;
  _7 = MEM <uint128_t> [(char * {ref-all})&y];
in bswap or store merging.
Though, current bswap infrastructure I'm afraid limits it to 64-bit size,
because it tracks the bytes in uint64_t vars and uses 8 bits to determine which
byte it is (0 value of zero, 1-8 byte index and 0xff unknown).
While that is 10 different values right now, if we handled uint128_t we'd need
18 different values times 16.

Note, even:
unsigned long long
bswap (unsigned long long a)
{
  unsigned int x[2];
  __builtin_memcpy (x, &a, 8);
  unsigned int y[2];
  y[0] = __builtin_bswap32 (x[1]);
  y[1] = __builtin_bswap32 (x[0]);
  __builtin_memcpy (&a, y, 8);
  return a;
}

unsigned long long
bswap2 (unsigned long long a)
{
  return __builtin_bswap64 (a);
}
emits better code in the latter function rather than former store-merging
isn't able to handle even that.
So we want to handle it in store-merging, we should start with handling
  _8 = BIT_FIELD_REF <a_3(D), 32, 32>;
  _1 = __builtin_bswap32 (_8);
  _10 = (unsigned int) a_3(D);
  _2 = __builtin_bswap32 (_10);
  _11 = {_1, _2};
  _5 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<unsigned long>(_11);
and
  _8 = BIT_FIELD_REF <a_3(D), 32, 32>;
  _1 = __builtin_bswap32 (_8);
  y[0] = _1;
  _10 = (unsigned int) a_3(D);
  _2 = __builtin_bswap32 (_10);
  y[1] = _2;
  _7 = MEM <unsigned long> [(char * {ref-all})&y];
and only once that is handled try
  _8 = BIT_FIELD_REF <a_3(D), 64, 64>;
  _1 = __builtin_bswap64 (_8);
  _10 = (long long unsigned int) a_3(D);
  _2 = __builtin_bswap64 (_10);
  _11 = {_1, _2};
  _5 = VIEW_CONVERT_EXPR<uint128_t>(_11);
Doesn't look like stage4 material though.

So in the meantime perhaps some other improvements.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-01-28 12:20 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-20 23:24 [Bug target/104151] New: " nekotekina at gmail dot com
2022-01-20 23:41 ` [Bug middle-end/104151] [9/10/11/12 Regression] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-21  1:03 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2022-01-21  1:25 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2022-01-21  1:28 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2022-01-21  1:32 ` crazylht at gmail dot com
2022-01-21  8:28 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-21  9:11 ` rsandifo at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-21 10:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-21 10:29 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-01-21 12:20 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
2022-01-28 12:20 ` jakub at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2022-01-31 14:06 ` ubizjak at gmail dot com
2022-05-06  8:32 ` [Bug middle-end/104151] [9/10/11/12/13 " jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
2022-09-06 22:04 ` [Bug middle-end/104151] [10/11/12/13 " pobrn at protonmail dot com
2022-09-07  8:18 ` rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-08 12:23 ` [Bug middle-end/104151] [10/11/12/13/14 " rguenth at gcc dot gnu.org
2023-05-11 13:17 ` chfast at gmail dot com

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=bug-104151-4-MOwSCsHREk@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).