From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-347352-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 14202 invoked by alias); 15 Feb 2011 15:36:59 -0000
Received: (qmail 14098 invoked by uid 22791); 15 Feb 2011 15:36:58 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.7 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:36:52 +0000
From: "kretz at kde dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/47754] New: [missed optimization] AVX allows unaligned memory operands but GCC uses unaligned load and register operand
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: new
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: target
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: minor
X-Bugzilla-Who: kretz at kde dot org
X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: ---
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-47754-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 15:37:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-02/txt/msg01818.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=47754

           Summary: [missed optimization] AVX allows unaligned memory
                    operands but GCC uses unaligned load and register
                    operand
           Product: gcc
           Version: 4.5.0
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: minor
          Priority: P3
         Component: target
        AssignedTo: unassigned@gcc.gnu.org
        ReportedBy: kretz@kde.org


According to the AVX docs: "With the exception of explicitly aligned 16 or 32
byte SIMD load/store instructions, most VEX-encoded, arithmetic and data
processing instructions operate in a flexible environment regarding memory
address alignment, i.e. VEX-encoded instruction with 32-byte or 16-byte load
semantics will support unaligned load operation by default. Memory arguments
for most instructions with VEX prefix operate normally without causing #GP(0)
on any byte-granularity alignment (unlike Legacy SSE instructions)."

I tested whether GCC would take advantage of this, and found that it doesn't:

_mm256_store_ps(&data[3],
  _mm256_add_ps(_mm256_load_ps(&data[0]), _mm256_load_ps(&data[1]))
);
compiles to:
vmovaps 0x200b18(%rip),%ymm0
vaddps 0x200b13(%rip),%ymm0,%ymm0
vmovaps %ymm0,0x200b10(%rip)

whereas

_mm256_store_ps(&data[3],
  _mm256_add_ps(_mm256_loadu_ps(&data[0]), _mm256_loadu_ps(&data[1]))
);
compiles to:
vmovups 0x200b4c(%rip),%ymm0
vmovups 0x200b40(%rip),%ymm1
vaddps %ymm0,%ymm1,%ymm0
vmovaps %ymm0,0x200b3c(%rip)

GCC could use a memory operand in the vaddps here instead. According to the AVX
docs, this doesn't hurt performance. But it reduces register pressure AFAIU.

Would be nice to have.