From: Juzhe-Zhong <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>
To: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
Cc: kito.cheng@gmail.com, kito.cheng@sifive.com,
jeffreyalaw@gmail.com, rdapp.gcc@gmail.com,
Juzhe-Zhong <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>
Subject: [PATCH] RISC-V: Expand VLMAX scalar move in reduction
Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 09:56:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240202015659.54072-1-juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai> (raw)
This patch fixes the following:
vsetvli a5,a1,e32,m1,tu,ma
slli a4,a5,2
sub a1,a1,a5
vle32.v v2,0(a0)
add a0,a0,a4
vadd.vv v1,v2,v1
bne a1,zero,.L3
vsetivli zero,1,e32,m1,ta,ma
vmv.s.x v2,zero
vsetvli a5,zero,e32,m1,ta,ma ---> Redundant vsetvl.
vredsum.vs v1,v1,v2
vmv.x.s a0,v1
ret
VSETVL PASS is able to fuse avl = 1 of scalar move and VLMAX avl of reduction.
However, this following RTL blocks the fusion in dependence analysis in VSETVL PASS:
(insn 49 24 50 5 (set (reg:RVVM1SI 98 v2 [148])
(if_then_else:RVVM1SI (unspec:RVVMF32BI [
(const_vector:RVVMF32BI [
(const_int 1 [0x1])
repeat [
(const_int 0 [0])
]
])
(const_int 1 [0x1])
(const_int 2 [0x2]) repeated x2
(const_int 0 [0])
(reg:SI 66 vl)
(reg:SI 67 vtype)
] UNSPEC_VPREDICATE)
(const_vector:RVVM1SI repeat [
(const_int 0 [0])
])
(unspec:RVVM1SI [
(reg:DI 0 zero)
] UNSPEC_VUNDEF))) 3813 {*pred_broadcastrvvm1si_zero}
(nil))
(insn 50 49 51 5 (set (reg:DI 15 a5 [151]) ----> It set a5, blocks the following VLMAX into the scalar move above.
(unspec:DI [
(const_int 32 [0x20])
] UNSPEC_VLMAX)) 2566 {vlmax_avldi}
(expr_list:REG_EQUIV (unspec:DI [
(const_int 32 [0x20])
] UNSPEC_VLMAX)
(nil)))
(insn 51 50 52 5 (set (reg:RVVM1SI 97 v1 [150])
(unspec:RVVM1SI [
(unspec:RVVMF32BI [
(const_vector:RVVMF32BI repeat [
(const_int 1 [0x1])
])
(reg:DI 15 a5 [151])
(const_int 2 [0x2])
(const_int 1 [0x1])
(reg:SI 66 vl)
(reg:SI 67 vtype)
] UNSPEC_VPREDICATE)
(unspec:RVVM1SI [
(reg:RVVM1SI 97 v1 [orig:134 vect_result_14.6 ] [134])
(reg:RVVM1SI 98 v2 [148])
] UNSPEC_REDUC_SUM)
(unspec:RVVM1SI [
(reg:DI 0 zero)
] UNSPEC_VUNDEF)
] UNSPEC_REDUC)) 17541 {pred_redsumrvvm1si}
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:RVVM1SI 98 v2 [148])
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:SI 66 vl)
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 15 a5 [151])
(expr_list:REG_DEAD (reg:DI 0 zero)
(nil))))))
Such situation can only happen on auto-vectorization, never happen on intrinsic codes.
Since the reduction is passed VLMAX AVL, it should be more natural to pass VLMAX to the scalar move which initial the value of the reduction.
After this patch:
vsetvli a5,a1,e32,m1,tu,ma
slli a4,a5,2
sub a1,a1,a5
vle32.v v2,0(a0)
add a0,a0,a4
vadd.vv v1,v2,v1
bne a1,zero,.L3
vsetvli a5,zero,e32,m1,ta,ma
vmv.s.x v2,zero
vredsum.vs v1,v1,v2
vmv.x.s a0,v1
ret
Tested on both RV32/RV64 no regression.
PR target/113697
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv-v.cc (expand_reduction): Pass VLMAX avl to scalar move.
gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/pr113697.c: New test.
---
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-v.cc | 12 +++++++-----
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/pr113697.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/pr113697.c
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-v.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-v.cc
index 4bacb7fea45..0cfbd21ce6f 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-v.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-v.cc
@@ -4151,13 +4151,15 @@ expand_reduction (unsigned unspec, unsigned insn_flags, rtx *ops, rtx init)
rtx m1_tmp = gen_reg_rtx (m1_mode);
rtx scalar_move_ops[] = {m1_tmp, init};
- emit_nonvlmax_insn (code_for_pred_broadcast (m1_mode), SCALAR_MOVE_OP,
- scalar_move_ops,
- need_mask_operand_p (insn_flags) ? ops[3]
- : CONST1_RTX (Pmode));
+ insn_code icode = code_for_pred_broadcast (m1_mode);
+ if (need_mask_operand_p (insn_flags))
+ emit_nonvlmax_insn (icode, SCALAR_MOVE_OP, scalar_move_ops, ops[3]);
+ else
+ emit_vlmax_insn (icode, SCALAR_MOVE_OP, scalar_move_ops);
+
rtx m1_tmp2 = gen_reg_rtx (m1_mode);
rtx reduc_ops[] = {m1_tmp2, vector_src, m1_tmp};
- insn_code icode = code_for_pred (unspec, vmode);
+ icode = code_for_pred (unspec, vmode);
if (need_mask_operand_p (insn_flags))
{
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/pr113697.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/pr113697.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..588b86c7e6c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/pr113697.c
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O3 -march=rv64gcv -mabi=lp64d -fno-schedule-insns" } */
+
+int
+foo (int *__restrict a, int n)
+{
+ int result = 0;
+ for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
+ result += a[i];
+ return result;
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {vsetvli} 3 } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not {vsetivli} } } */
--
2.36.3
next reply other threads:[~2024-02-02 1:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-02-02 1:56 Juzhe-Zhong [this message]
2024-02-02 9:50 ` Kito Cheng
2024-02-05 3:26 ` Jeff Law
2024-02-05 4:36 ` Jeff Law
2024-02-05 6:37 ` juzhe.zhong
2024-02-05 15:34 ` Jeff Law
2024-02-05 19:09 ` Jeff Law
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=20240202015659.54072-1-juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai \
--to=juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=kito.cheng@gmail.com \
--cc=kito.cheng@sifive.com \
--cc=rdapp.gcc@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).