From: "Roger Sayle" <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
To: <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Cc: "'Uros Bizjak'" <ubizjak@gmail.com>
Subject: [x86_64 PATCH] Correct insn_cost of movabsq.
Date: Wed, 22 May 2024 16:15:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <007701daac5a$d94d0af0$8be720d0$@nextmovesoftware.com> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1879 bytes --]
This single line patch fixes a strange quirk/glitch in i386's rtx_costs,
which considers an instruction loading a 64-bit constant to be significantly
cheaper than loading a 32-bit (or smaller) constant.
Consider the two functions:
unsigned long long foo() { return 0x0123456789abcdefULL; }
unsigned int bar() { return 10; }
and the corresponding lines from combine's dump file:
insn_cost 1 for #: r98:DI=0x123456789abcdef
insn_cost 4 for #: ax:SI=0xa
The same issue can be seen in -dP assembler output.
movabsq $81985529216486895, %rax # 5 [c=1 l=10] *movdi_internal/4
The problem is that pattern_costs interpretation of rtx_costs contains
"return cost > 0 ? cost : COSTS_N_INSNS (1)" where a zero value (for
example a register or small immediate constant) is considered special,
and equivalent to a single instruction, but all other values are treated
as verbatim. Hence to make x86_64's 10-byte long movabsq instruction
slightly more expensive than a simple constant, rtx_costs needs to
return COSTS_N_INSNS(1)+1 and not 1. With this change, the insn_cost
of movabsq is the intended value 5:
insn_cost 5 for #: r98:DI=0x123456789abcdef
and
movabsq $81985529216486895, %rax # 5 [c=5 l=10] *movdi_internal/4
[I'd originally tried fixing this by adding a ix86_insn_cost target
hook, but the testsuite is very sensitive to the costing of insns].
This patch has been tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with make bootstrap
and make -k check, both with and without --target_board=unix{-m32}
with no new failures. Ok for mainline?
2024-05-22 Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
gcc/ChangeLog
* config/i386/i386.cc (ix86_rtx_costs) <case CONST_INT>:
A CONST_INT that isn't x86_64_immediate_operand requires an extra
(expensive) movabsq insn to load, so return COSTS_N_INSNS (1) + 1.
Thanks in advance,
Roger
--
[-- Attachment #2: patchic3.txt --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 430 bytes --]
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
index b4838b7..b4a9519 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc
@@ -21569,7 +21569,7 @@ ix86_rtx_costs (rtx x, machine_mode mode, int outer_code_i, int opno,
if (x86_64_immediate_operand (x, VOIDmode))
*total = 0;
else
- *total = 1;
+ *total = COSTS_N_INSNS (1) + 1;
return true;
case CONST_DOUBLE:
next reply other threads:[~2024-05-22 15:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-22 15:15 Roger Sayle [this message]
2024-05-22 15:29 ` Uros Bizjak
2024-05-22 17:54 ` Richard Biener
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='007701daac5a$d94d0af0$8be720d0$@nextmovesoftware.com' \
--to=roger@nextmovesoftware.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
/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).