[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

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

--- Comment #8 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-09-09 11:22:33 UTC ---
Just for the record, a rather recent discussion on the issue:

Original thread start:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-06/msg00388.html

Continuation:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-07/msg00250.html

Continuation:
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2010-08/msg00044.html

Aggregated version:
http://www.mentby.com/Group/gcc-discuss/sh-optimized-software-floating-point-routines.html

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

--- Comment #9 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-07 21:37:47 UTC ---
Jörn,
I was curious whether the soft fpu code of yours is also available as C/C++, or
did you write it in asm only?  I guess it would be an interesting bunch of code
quality tests for the compiler.

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

--- Comment #10 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke <amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-07 22:40:39 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #9)
> Jörn,
> I was curious whether the soft fpu code of yours is also available as C/C++, or
> did you write it in asm only?  I guess it would be an interesting bunch of code
> quality tests for the compiler.

I wrote it as asm only.  There are a number of C implementations of software
floating point available, but the compiler is not much good at combining
high-level transformations with streamlined data representation,
ABI modification, register allocation and scheduling to make the best use
of an architecture.

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

--- Comment #11 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-07 23:33:55 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #10)
> but the compiler is not much good at combining
> high-level transformations with streamlined data representation,
> ABI modification, register allocation and scheduling to make the best use
> of an architecture.

Do you have any particular example in mind?
Generally, true ... but things are improving slowly ;)

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

--- Comment #12 from Jorn Wolfgang Rennecke <amylaar at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-07 23:56:37 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #11)

> Do you have any particular example in mind?

Just compare the size & performance of the code generated from fp-bit.c with
the hand-coded asm.  Also observe how comparisons for the latter are lighter
on the caller as less registers are clobbered.

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org]

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

--- Comment #13 from Oleg Endo <olegendo at gcc dot gnu.org> 2012-11-08 01:08:51 UTC ---
(In reply to comment #12)
> (In reply to comment #11)
> 
> > Do you have any particular example in mind?
> 
> Just compare the size & performance of the code generated from fp-bit.c with
> the hand-coded asm.  Also observe how comparisons for the latter are lighter
> on the caller as less registers are clobbered.

OK, I get the point (not much to compare -- it's pretty obvious).
Maybe it would make sense to transition the sh soft fp stuff step by step (insn
by insn) from the generic fp-bit to custom fp code...

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #7 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org  2007-02-01 03:41 -------
(In reply to comment #4)
> Hereattached a patch to fix a few problems:
> 
> 1) Rounding to nearest must be infinity if the "infinitely precise result has a
> magniture at least 2 exp Emax (2-2exp-p)" (ansi 754/1985 sect 4.1). The
> implementation for addsf3 and adddf3 returned a NaN.

Not always a NaN, but it's a bug regardless.  Good catch.
However, this:

 LOCAL(inf):
+       mov     #0,DBLRL

negatively impacts sh3 MA unit scheduling.

It might be an idea to align LOCAL(pos_difference_0) for sh3.


-       tst     r7,r0
+       tst     r7,r0           

You have to be careful with the whitespace.

> 2) Infinity in divsf3.S was not set (case of 1.0/0.0).

>         * config/sh/IEEE-754/m3/divsf3.S: Intialize xff000000 label.
> 
This was supposed to be:

LOCAL(m1):      .word -1
        .balign 4
LOCAL(xff000000):
#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN__
 .word 0
LOCAL(xff00):   .word 0xff00
#else
LOCAL(xff00):   .word 0xff00
 .word 0
#endif

saving four bytes over using unshared constants.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[christian dot bruel at st dot com]

------- Comment #6 from christian dot bruel at st dot com  2007-01-31 13:56 -------
(From update of attachment 12986)
(note: this diff was made from the wrong direction. (-) shows the newest
version. sorry


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[christian dot bruel at st dot com]

------- Comment #5 from christian dot bruel at st dot com  2007-01-31 13:50 -------
Created an attachment (id=12986)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12986&action=view)
fixes the nearest to infinity and divide by 0 bugs.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[christian dot bruel at st dot com]

------- Comment #4 from christian dot bruel at st dot com  2007-01-31 13:47 -------
Hereattached a patch to fix a few problems:

1) Rounding to nearest must be infinity if the "infinitely precise result has a
magniture at least 2 exp Emax (2-2exp-p)" (ansi 754/1985 sect 4.1). The
implementation for addsf3 and adddf3 returned a NaN.
2) Infinity in divsf3.S was not set (case of 1.0/0.0).

2007-01-29  Christian Bruel  <christian.bruel@st.com>

        * config/sh/IEEE-754/m3/adddf3.S: Fix inf mantissa.
        * config/sh/IEEE-754/m3/addsf3.S: Likewise.
        * config/sh/IEEE-754/m3/divsf3.S: Intialize xff000000 label.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #3 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-11-29 19:03 -------
Created an attachment (id=12709)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12709&action=view)
ChangeLog entries for softfp-diff-20061110

The previous version was missing the enumeration of two new files.


-- 

amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #12708|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #2 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-11-29 18:52 -------
Created an attachment (id=12708)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12708&action=view)
ChangeLog entries for softfp-diff-20061110

These are the ChangeLog entries for the SH specific code.

The ChangeLog entries for the target-independent code are included in the
patches for the blocking PRs (28618, 29846 and 29847) .


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845

[Bug target/29845] sh floating point emulation is inefficient

[amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org]

------- Comment #1 from amylaar at gcc dot gnu dot org  2006-11-15 18:02 -------
Created an attachment (id=12624)
 --> (http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=12624&action=view)
patch

This patch has been regression tested on i686-pc-linux-gnu X sh-elf.
However, I need approval for the non-SH parts before I can commit it.


-- 


http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29845