Re: [off-list] Re: [PATCH PR68542]

Re: [off-list] Re: [PATCH PR68542]

[Yuri Rumyantsev]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3746 bytes --]

Uros,

Here is update patch which includes (1) couple changes proposed by
Richard in tree-vect-loop.c and (2) the changes in back-end proposed
by you.

Is it OK for trunk?
Bootstrap and regression testing dis not show any new failures.

ChangeLog:

2016-01-29  Yuri Rumyantsev  <ysrumyan@gmail.com>

PR middle-end/68542
* config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expand_branch): Add support for conditional
branch with vector comparison.
*config/i386/sse.md (Vi48_AVX): New mode iterator.
(define_expand "cbranch<mode>4): Add support for conditional branch
with vector comparison.
* tree-vect-loop.c (optimize_mask_stores): New function.
* tree-vect-stmts.c (vectorizable_mask_load_store): Initialize
has_mask_store field of vect_info.
* tree-vectorizer.c (vectorize_loops): Invoke optimaze_mask_stores for
vectorized loops having masked stores after vec_info destroy.
* tree-vectorizer.h (loop_vec_info): Add new has_mask_store field and
correspondent macros.
(optimize_mask_stores): Add prototype.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
* gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: New test.
* testsuite/gcc.target/i386/avx2-vect-mask-store-move1.c: Likewise.

2016-01-29 15:26 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>:
> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrumyan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Uros,
>>
>> Thanks for your comments.
>> I deleted swap of operands as you told.
>> Let me explain my point in adding support for conditional branches
>> with vector comparison.
>> This feature is used to put  vectorized masked stores  and its
>> producers under guard that checks that mask is not zero, i.e. if mask
>> which is result of other vector computations is zero we don't need to
>> execute correspondent masked store and its producers if they don't
>> have other uses. It means that only integer 128-bit and 256-bit
>> vectors must be accepted as operands of cbranch. I did not introduce
>> new iterator but simply used existence iterator V48_AVX2. BTW you
>> proposed to add new iterator VI_AVX but it would be better to ad
>> VI48_AVX as
>>
>> (define_mode_iterator Vi48_AVX
>> [(V4SI "TARGET_AVX") (V2DI "TARGET_AVX")
>> (V8SI "TARGET_AVX") (V4DI "TARGET_AVX")])
>>
>> I also don't think that we need to add support in expand_compare since
>> such comparisons are not  generated.
>
> OK with me. If there is no need for cstore pattern, then the
> comparison can be integrated with existing code in expand_branch by
> using ""goto simple" as is already the case there.
>
> BR,
> Uros.
>
>> 2016-01-28 20:08 GMT+03:00 Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>:
>>> Yuri,
>>>
>>> please find attached a target-dependent patch that illustrates my
>>> review remarks. The patch is lightly tested, and it produces desired
>>> ptest insns on the testcases you provided.
>>>
>>> Some further remarks:
>>>
>>> +      tmp = gen_rtx_fmt_ee (code, VOIDmode, flag, const0_rtx);
>>> +      if (code == EQ)
>>> +    tmp = gen_rtx_IF_THEN_ELSE (VOIDmode, tmp,
>>> +                    gen_rtx_LABEL_REF (VOIDmode, label), pc_rtx);
>>> +      else
>>> +    tmp = gen_rtx_IF_THEN_ELSE (VOIDmode, tmp,
>>> +                    pc_rtx, gen_rtx_LABEL_REF (VOIDmode, label));
>>> +      emit_jump_insn (gen_rtx_SET (pc_rtx, tmp));
>>> +      return;
>>>
>>> The above code is IMO wrong. You don't need to swap the arms of the
>>> target, since "code" will generate je or jne. Please see the attached
>>> patch.
>>>
>>> BTW: Maybe we can introduce corresponding cstore pattrn to use ptest
>>> in order to more efficiently vectorize code like:
>>>
>>> --cut here--
>>> int a[256];
>>>
>>> int foo (void)
>>> {
>>>   int ret = 0;
>>>   int i;
>>>
>>>   for (i = 0; i < 256; i++)
>>>     {
>>>       if (a[i] != 0)
>>>     ret = 1;
>>>     }
>>>   return ret;
>>> }
>>> --cut here--
>>>
>>> Uros.

[-- Attachment #2: PR68542.patch.3 --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 13938 bytes --]

diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
index 733d0ab..ea90150 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.c
@@ -21669,6 +21669,30 @@ ix86_expand_branch (enum rtx_code code, rtx op0, rtx op1, rtx label)
   machine_mode mode = GET_MODE (op0);
   rtx tmp;
 
+  /* Handle special case - vector comparsion with boolean result, transform
+     it using ptest instruction.  */
+  if (GET_MODE_CLASS (mode) == MODE_VECTOR_INT)
+    {
+      rtx flag = gen_rtx_REG (CCZmode, FLAGS_REG);
+      machine_mode p_mode = GET_MODE_SIZE (mode) == 32 ? V4DImode : V2DImode;
+
+      gcc_assert (code == EQ || code == NE);
+      /* Generate XOR since we can't check that one operand is zero vector.  */
+      tmp = gen_reg_rtx (mode);
+      emit_insn (gen_rtx_SET (tmp, gen_rtx_XOR (mode, op0, op1)));
+      tmp = gen_lowpart (p_mode, tmp);
+      emit_insn (gen_rtx_SET (gen_rtx_REG (CCmode, FLAGS_REG),
+			      gen_rtx_UNSPEC (CCmode,
+					      gen_rtvec (2, tmp, tmp),
+					      UNSPEC_PTEST)));
+      tmp = gen_rtx_fmt_ee (code, VOIDmode, flag, const0_rtx);
+      tmp = gen_rtx_IF_THEN_ELSE (VOIDmode, tmp,
+				  gen_rtx_LABEL_REF (VOIDmode, label),
+				  pc_rtx);
+      emit_jump_insn (gen_rtx_SET (pc_rtx, tmp));
+      return;
+    }
+
   switch (mode)
     {
     case SFmode:
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
index 6740edf..e6e2685 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
@@ -305,6 +305,10 @@
    (V8SI "TARGET_AVX") (V4DI "TARGET_AVX")
    (V8SF "TARGET_AVX") (V4DF"TARGET_AVX")])
 
+(define_mode_iterator Vi48_AVX
+ [(V4SI "TARGET_AVX") (V2DI "TARGET_AVX")
+  (V8SI "TARGET_AVX") (V4DI "TARGET_AVX")])
+
 (define_mode_iterator VI8
   [(V8DI "TARGET_AVX512F") (V4DI "TARGET_AVX") V2DI])
 
@@ -18350,6 +18354,23 @@
 	  (match_operand:<avx512fmaskmode> 2 "register_operand")))]
   "TARGET_AVX512BW")
 
+(define_expand "cbranch<mode>4"
+  [(set (reg:CC FLAGS_REG)
+	(compare:CC (match_operand:Vi48_AVX 1 "register_operand")
+		    (match_operand:Vi48_AVX 2 "nonimmediate_operand")))
+   (set (pc) (if_then_else
+	       (match_operator 0 "bt_comparison_operator"
+		[(reg:CC FLAGS_REG) (const_int 0)])
+	       (label_ref (match_operand 3))
+	       (pc)))]
+  "TARGET_SSE4_1"
+{
+  ix86_expand_branch (GET_CODE (operands[0]),
+		      operands[1], operands[2], operands[3]);
+  DONE;
+})
+
+
 (define_insn_and_split "avx_<castmode><avxsizesuffix>_<castmode>"
   [(set (match_operand:AVX256MODE2P 0 "nonimmediate_operand" "=x,m")
 	(unspec:AVX256MODE2P
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e575f6d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O3" } */
+/* { dg-additional-options "-mavx2" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
+
+#define N 256
+int p1[N], p2[N], p3[N];
+int c[N];
+void foo (int n)
+{
+  int i;
+  for (i=0; i<n; i++)
+    if (c[i])
+      {
+	p1[i] += 1;
+	p2[i] = p3[i] +2;
+      }
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/avx2-vect-mask-store-move1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/avx2-vect-mask-store-move1.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2a10560
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/avx2-vect-mask-store-move1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
+/* { dg-options "-O3 -mavx2 -fdump-tree-vect-details" } */
+/* { dg-require-effective-target avx2 } */
+
+#include "avx2-check.h"
+#define N 32
+int *p1, *p2, *p3;
+int c[N];
+int p1ref[N], p2ref[N];
+
+__attribute__((noinline, noclone)) void foo (int n)
+{
+  int i;
+  for (i=0; i<n; i++)
+    if (c[i])
+      {
+	p1[i] += 1;
+	p2[i] = p3[i] +2;
+      }
+}
+
+void init ()
+{
+  p1ref[0]=1; p2ref[0]=2;
+  p1ref[1]=3; p2ref[1]=5;
+  p1ref[2]=5; p2ref[2]=8;
+  p1ref[3]=7; p2ref[3]=11;
+  p1ref[4]=9; p2ref[4]=14;
+  p1ref[5]=11; p2ref[5]=17;
+  p1ref[6]=13; p2ref[6]=20;
+  p1ref[7]=15; p2ref[7]=23;
+  p1ref[8]=16; p2ref[8]=8;
+  p1ref[9]=18; p2ref[9]=9;
+  p1ref[10]=20; p2ref[10]=10;
+  p1ref[11]=22; p2ref[11]=11;
+  p1ref[12]=24; p2ref[12]=12;
+  p1ref[13]=26; p2ref[13]=13;
+  p1ref[14]=28; p2ref[14]=14;
+  p1ref[15]=30; p2ref[15]=15;
+  p1ref[16]=33; p2ref[16]=50;
+  p1ref[17]=35; p2ref[17]=53;
+  p1ref[18]=37; p2ref[18]=56;
+  p1ref[19]=39; p2ref[19]=59;
+  p1ref[20]=41; p2ref[20]=62;
+  p1ref[21]=43; p2ref[21]=65;
+  p1ref[22]=45; p2ref[22]=68;
+  p1ref[23]=47; p2ref[23]=71;
+  p1ref[24]=48; p2ref[24]=24;
+  p1ref[25]=50; p2ref[25]=25;
+  p1ref[26]=52; p2ref[26]=26;
+  p1ref[27]=54; p2ref[27]=27;
+  p1ref[28]=56; p2ref[28]=28;
+  p1ref[29]=58; p2ref[29]=29;
+  p1ref[30]=60; p2ref[30]=30;
+  p1ref[31]=62; p2ref[31]=31;
+}
+
+static void
+avx2_test (void)
+{
+  int * P = malloc (N * 3 * sizeof (int));
+  int i;
+
+  p1 = &P[0];
+  p2 = &P[N];
+  p3 = &P[2 * N];
+  for (i=0; i<N; i++) {
+    p1[i] = i + i;
+    p3[i] = i * 3;
+    p2[i] = i;
+    c[i] = (i >> 3) & 1? 0: 1;
+  }
+  init ();
+  foo (N);
+  for (i=0; i<N;i++)
+    if (p1[i] != p1ref[i] || p2[i] != p2ref[i])
+      abort ();
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" } } */
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c
index 77ad760..60b0a09 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c
@@ -6927,3 +6927,195 @@ vect_transform_loop (loop_vec_info loop_vinfo)
       dump_printf (MSG_NOTE, "\n");
     }
 }
+
+/* The code below is trying to perform simple optimization - revert
+   if-conversion for masked stores, i.e. if the mask of a store is zero
+   do not perform it and all stored value producers also if possible.
+   For example,
+     for (i=0; i<n; i++)
+       if (c[i])
+	{
+	  p1[i] += 1;
+	  p2[i] = p3[i] +2;
+	}
+   this transformation will produce the following semi-hammock:
+
+   if (!mask__ifc__42.18_165 == { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 })
+     {
+       vect__11.19_170 = MASK_LOAD (vectp_p1.20_168, 0B, mask__ifc__42.18_165);
+       vect__12.22_172 = vect__11.19_170 + vect_cst__171;
+       MASK_STORE (vectp_p1.23_175, 0B, mask__ifc__42.18_165, vect__12.22_172);
+       vect__18.25_182 = MASK_LOAD (vectp_p3.26_180, 0B, mask__ifc__42.18_165);
+       vect__19.28_184 = vect__18.25_182 + vect_cst__183;
+       MASK_STORE (vectp_p2.29_187, 0B, mask__ifc__42.18_165, vect__19.28_184);
+     }
+*/
+
+void
+optimize_mask_stores (struct loop *loop)
+{
+  basic_block *bbs = get_loop_body (loop);
+  unsigned nbbs = loop->num_nodes;
+  unsigned i;
+  basic_block bb;
+  gimple_stmt_iterator gsi;
+  gimple *stmt, *stmt1 = NULL;
+  auto_vec<gimple *> worklist;
+
+  vect_location = find_loop_location (loop);
+  /* Pick up all masked stores in loop if any.  */
+  for (i = 0; i < nbbs; i++)
+    {
+      bb = bbs[i];
+      for (gsi = gsi_start_bb (bb); !gsi_end_p (gsi);
+	   gsi_next (&gsi))
+	{
+	  stmt = gsi_stmt (gsi);
+	  if (is_gimple_call (stmt)
+	      && gimple_call_internal_p (stmt)
+	      && gimple_call_internal_fn (stmt) == IFN_MASK_STORE)
+	    worklist.safe_push (stmt);
+	}
+    }
+
+  free (bbs);
+  if (worklist.is_empty ())
+    return;
+
+  /* Loop has masked stores.  */
+  while (!worklist.is_empty ())
+    {
+      gimple *last, *last_store;
+      edge e, efalse;
+      tree mask;
+      basic_block store_bb, join_bb;
+      gimple_stmt_iterator gsi_to;
+      tree vdef, new_vdef;
+      gphi *phi;
+      tree vectype;
+      tree zero;
+
+      last = worklist.pop ();
+      mask = gimple_call_arg (last, 2);
+      bb = gimple_bb (last);
+      /* Create new bb.  */
+      e = split_block (bb, last);
+      join_bb = e->dest;
+      store_bb = create_empty_bb (bb);
+      add_bb_to_loop (store_bb, loop);
+      e->flags = EDGE_TRUE_VALUE;
+      efalse = make_edge (bb, store_bb, EDGE_FALSE_VALUE);
+      /* Put STORE_BB to likely part.  */
+      efalse->probability = PROB_UNLIKELY;
+      store_bb->frequency = PROB_ALWAYS - EDGE_FREQUENCY (efalse);
+      make_edge (store_bb, join_bb, EDGE_FALLTHRU);
+      if (dom_info_available_p (CDI_DOMINATORS))
+	set_immediate_dominator (CDI_DOMINATORS, store_bb, bb);
+      if (dump_enabled_p ())
+	dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
+			 "Create new block %d to sink mask stores.",
+			 store_bb->index);
+      /* Create vector comparison with boolean result.  */
+      vectype = TREE_TYPE (mask);
+      zero = build_zero_cst (vectype);
+      stmt = gimple_build_cond (EQ_EXPR, mask, zero, NULL_TREE, NULL_TREE);
+      gsi = gsi_last_bb (bb);
+      gsi_insert_after (&gsi, stmt, GSI_SAME_STMT);
+      /* Create new PHI node for vdef of the last masked store:
+	 .MEM_2 = VDEF <.MEM_1>
+	 will be converted to
+	 .MEM.3 = VDEF <.MEM_1>
+	 and new PHI node will be created in join bb
+	 .MEM_2 = PHI <.MEM_1, .MEM_3>
+      */
+      vdef = gimple_vdef (last);
+      new_vdef = make_ssa_name (gimple_vop (cfun), last);
+      gimple_set_vdef (last, new_vdef);
+      phi = create_phi_node (vdef, join_bb);
+      add_phi_arg (phi, new_vdef, EDGE_SUCC (store_bb, 0), UNKNOWN_LOCATION);
+
+      /* Put all masked stores with the same mask to STORE_BB if possible.  */
+      while (true)
+	{
+	  gimple_stmt_iterator gsi_from;
+	  /* Move masked store to STORE_BB.  */
+	  last_store = last;
+	  gsi = gsi_for_stmt (last);
+	  gsi_from = gsi;
+	  /* Shift GSI to the previous stmt for further traversal.  */
+	  gsi_prev (&gsi);
+	  gsi_to = gsi_start_bb (store_bb);
+	  gsi_move_before (&gsi_from, &gsi_to);
+	  /* Setup GSI_TO to the non-empty block start.  */
+	  gsi_to = gsi_start_bb (store_bb);
+	  if (dump_enabled_p ())
+	    {
+	      dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
+			       "Move stmt to created bb\n");
+	      dump_gimple_stmt (MSG_NOTE, TDF_SLIM, last, 0);
+	    }
+	    /* Move all stored value producers if possible.  */
+	    while (!gsi_end_p (gsi))
+	      {
+		tree lhs;
+		imm_use_iterator imm_iter;
+		use_operand_p use_p;
+		bool res;
+		stmt1 = gsi_stmt (gsi);
+		/* Do not consider statements writing to memory.  */
+		if (gimple_vdef (stmt1))
+		  break;
+		gsi_from = gsi;
+		gsi_prev (&gsi);
+		lhs = gimple_get_lhs (stmt1);
+		if (!lhs)
+		  break;
+
+		/* LHS of vectorized stmt must be SSA_NAME.  */
+		if (TREE_CODE (lhs) != SSA_NAME)
+		  break;
+
+		/* Skip scalar statements.  */
+		if (!VECTOR_TYPE_P (TREE_TYPE (lhs)))
+		  continue;
+
+		/* Check that LHS does not have uses outside of STORE_BB.  */
+		res = true;
+		FOR_EACH_IMM_USE_FAST (use_p, imm_iter, lhs)
+		  {
+		    gimple *use_stmt;
+		    use_stmt = USE_STMT (use_p);
+		    if (gimple_bb (use_stmt) != store_bb)
+		      {
+			res = false;
+			break;
+		      }
+		  }
+		if (!res)
+		  break;
+
+		if (gimple_vuse (stmt1)
+		    && gimple_vuse (stmt1) != gimple_vuse (last_store))
+		  break;
+
+		/* Can move STMT1 to STORE_BB.  */
+		if (dump_enabled_p ())
+		  {
+		    dump_printf_loc (MSG_NOTE, vect_location,
+				     "Move stmt to created bb\n");
+		    dump_gimple_stmt (MSG_NOTE, TDF_SLIM, stmt1, 0);
+		  }
+		gsi_move_before (&gsi_from, &gsi_to);
+		/* Shift GSI_TO for further insertion.  */
+		gsi_prev (&gsi_to);
+	      }
+	    /* Put other masked stores with the same mask to STORE_BB.  */
+	    if (worklist.is_empty ()
+		|| gimple_call_arg (worklist.last (), 2) != mask
+		|| worklist.last () != stmt1)
+	      break;
+	    last = worklist.pop ();
+	}
+      add_phi_arg (phi, gimple_vuse (last_store), e, UNKNOWN_LOCATION);
+    }
+}
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
index 7c6fa73..645257b 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-stmts.c
@@ -2019,6 +2019,7 @@ vectorizable_mask_load_store (gimple *stmt, gimple_stmt_iterator *gsi,
     {
       tree vec_rhs = NULL_TREE, vec_mask = NULL_TREE;
       prev_stmt_info = NULL;
+      LOOP_VINFO_HAS_MASK_STORE (loop_vinfo) = true;
       for (i = 0; i < ncopies; i++)
 	{
 	  unsigned align, misalign;
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c
index c496c4b..3d8fbac 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c
+++ b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.c
@@ -604,12 +604,18 @@ vectorize_loops (void)
   for (i = 1; i < vect_loops_num; i++)
     {
       loop_vec_info loop_vinfo;
+      bool has_mask_store;
 
       loop = get_loop (cfun, i);
       if (!loop)
 	continue;
       loop_vinfo = (loop_vec_info) loop->aux;
+      has_mask_store = false;
+      if (loop_vinfo)
+	has_mask_store = LOOP_VINFO_HAS_MASK_STORE (loop_vinfo);
       destroy_loop_vec_info (loop_vinfo, true);
+      if (has_mask_store)
+	optimize_mask_stores (loop);
       loop->aux = NULL;
     }
 
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
index ac68750..b68ecd8 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
+++ b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h
@@ -333,6 +333,9 @@ typedef struct _loop_vec_info : public vec_info {
      loop version without if-conversion.  */
   struct loop *scalar_loop;
 
+  /* Mark loops having masked stores.  */
+  bool has_mask_store;
+
 } *loop_vec_info;
 
 /* Access Functions.  */
@@ -368,6 +371,7 @@ typedef struct _loop_vec_info : public vec_info {
 #define LOOP_VINFO_PEELING_FOR_NITER(L)    (L)->peeling_for_niter
 #define LOOP_VINFO_NO_DATA_DEPENDENCIES(L) (L)->no_data_dependencies
 #define LOOP_VINFO_SCALAR_LOOP(L)	   (L)->scalar_loop
+#define LOOP_VINFO_HAS_MASK_STORE(L)       (L)->has_mask_store
 #define LOOP_VINFO_SCALAR_ITERATION_COST(L) (L)->scalar_cost_vec
 #define LOOP_VINFO_SINGLE_SCALAR_ITERATION_COST(L) (L)->single_scalar_iteration_cost
 
@@ -1010,6 +1014,7 @@ extern void vect_get_vec_defs (tree, tree, gimple *, vec<tree> *,
 			       vec<tree> *, slp_tree, int);
 extern tree vect_gen_perm_mask_any (tree, const unsigned char *);
 extern tree vect_gen_perm_mask_checked (tree, const unsigned char *);
+extern void optimize_mask_stores (struct loop*);
 
 /* In tree-vect-data-refs.c.  */
 extern bool vect_can_force_dr_alignment_p (const_tree, unsigned int);

Re: [off-list] Re: [PATCH PR68542]

[Uros Bizjak]

On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 3:13 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrumyan@gmail.com> wrote:
> Uros,
>
> Here is update patch which includes (1) couple changes proposed by
> Richard in tree-vect-loop.c and (2) the changes in back-end proposed
> by you.
>
> Is it OK for trunk?
> Bootstrap and regression testing dis not show any new failures.
>
> ChangeLog:
>
> 2016-01-29  Yuri Rumyantsev  <ysrumyan@gmail.com>
>
> PR middle-end/68542
> * config/i386/i386.c (ix86_expand_branch): Add support for conditional
> branch with vector comparison.
> *config/i386/sse.md (Vi48_AVX): New mode iterator.
> (define_expand "cbranch<mode>4): Add support for conditional branch
> with vector comparison.
> * tree-vect-loop.c (optimize_mask_stores): New function.
> * tree-vect-stmts.c (vectorizable_mask_load_store): Initialize
> has_mask_store field of vect_info.
> * tree-vectorizer.c (vectorize_loops): Invoke optimaze_mask_stores for
> vectorized loops having masked stores after vec_info destroy.
> * tree-vectorizer.h (loop_vec_info): Add new has_mask_store field and
> correspondent macros.
> (optimize_mask_stores): Add prototype.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: New test.
> * testsuite/gcc.target/i386/avx2-vect-mask-store-move1.c: Likewise.


+(define_mode_iterator Vi48_AVX
+ [(V4SI "TARGET_AVX") (V2DI "TARGET_AVX")
+  (V8SI "TARGET_AVX") (V4DI "TARGET_AVX")])
+

Please name this iterator with all caps: VI48_AVX. Also, there is no
need for a condition at V4SI and V2DI:

(define_mode_iterator VI48_AVX
  [V4SI  V2DI
   (V8SI "TARGET_AVX") (V4DI "TARGET_AVX")

x86 part is OK with the above change.

Thanks,
Uros.

[Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[James Greenhalgh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 523 bytes --]


Hi,

As far as I can tell, this testcase will only vectorize for x86_64/i?86
targets, so it should be gated to only check for vectorization on those.

Additionally, this test wants to scan the vectorizer dumps, so we ought
to add -fdump-tree-vect-all to the options.

Checked on aarch64 (cross/native) and x86 with no issues.

OK?

Thanks,
James

---
2016-02-08  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>

	* gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Add dump option, and gate
	check on x86_64/i?86.


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Patch-Gate-vect-mask-store-move-1.c-correctly-and-ac.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch;  name=0001-Patch-Gate-vect-mask-store-move-1.c-correctly-and-ac.patch, Size: 734 bytes --]

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
index e575f6d..3ef613d 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-O3" } */
+/* { dg-options "-O3 -fdump-tree-vect-all" } */
 /* { dg-additional-options "-mavx2" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
 
 #define N 256
@@ -16,4 +16,4 @@ void foo (int n)
       }
 }
 
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } } */

Re: [Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[Yuri Rumyantsev]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 902 bytes --]

Hi James,

Thanks for reporting this issue.
I prepared slightly different patch since we don't need to add
tree-vect dump option - it is on by default for all tests in /vect
directory.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:

* gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Gate dump with x86 target.

2016-02-08 16:07 GMT+03:00 James Greenhalgh <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>:
>
> Hi,
>
> As far as I can tell, this testcase will only vectorize for x86_64/i?86
> targets, so it should be gated to only check for vectorization on those.
>
> Additionally, this test wants to scan the vectorizer dumps, so we ought
> to add -fdump-tree-vect-all to the options.
>
> Checked on aarch64 (cross/native) and x86 with no issues.
>
> OK?
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
> ---
> 2016-02-08  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
>
>         * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Add dump option, and gate
>         check on x86_64/i?86.
>

[-- Attachment #2: patch-test --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 504 bytes --]

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
index e575f6d..2892590 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
@@ -16,4 +16,4 @@ void foo (int n)
       }
 }
 
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect"{ target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } } */

Re: [Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[James Greenhalgh]

On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:29:31PM +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> Hi James,
> 
> Thanks for reporting this issue.
> I prepared slightly different patch since we don't need to add
> tree-vect dump option - it is on by default for all tests in /vect
> directory.

Hm, I added that line as my test runs were showing:

  UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: dump file does not exist

I would guess the explicit 

  /* { dg-options "-O3" } */

is clobbering the vect.exp setup of flags?

This also affects the x86-64 results H.J. Lu is sending out:

  https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2016-02/msg00824.html

Thanks,
James

> 
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> 
> * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Gate dump with x86 target.
> 
> 2016-02-08 16:07 GMT+03:00 James Greenhalgh <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > As far as I can tell, this testcase will only vectorize for x86_64/i?86
> > targets, so it should be gated to only check for vectorization on those.
> >
> > Additionally, this test wants to scan the vectorizer dumps, so we ought
> > to add -fdump-tree-vect-all to the options.
> >
> > Checked on aarch64 (cross/native) and x86 with no issues.
> >
> > OK?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > James
> >
> > ---
> > 2016-02-08  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
> >
> >         * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Add dump option, and gate
> >         check on x86_64/i?86.
> >

Re: [Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[Yuri Rumyantsev]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1676 bytes --]

Sorry for troubles.
One line must be excluded from test:
-/* { dg-options "-O3" } */

Here is updated patch.

Best regards.
Yuri.

2016-02-08 16:40 GMT+03:00 James Greenhalgh <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:29:31PM +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Thanks for reporting this issue.
>> I prepared slightly different patch since we don't need to add
>> tree-vect dump option - it is on by default for all tests in /vect
>> directory.
>
> Hm, I added that line as my test runs were showing:
>
>   UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: dump file does not exist
>
> I would guess the explicit
>
>   /* { dg-options "-O3" } */
>
> is clobbering the vect.exp setup of flags?
>
> This also affects the x86-64 results H.J. Lu is sending out:
>
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2016-02/msg00824.html
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Gate dump with x86 target.
>>
>> 2016-02-08 16:07 GMT+03:00 James Greenhalgh <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > As far as I can tell, this testcase will only vectorize for x86_64/i?86
>> > targets, so it should be gated to only check for vectorization on those.
>> >
>> > Additionally, this test wants to scan the vectorizer dumps, so we ought
>> > to add -fdump-tree-vect-all to the options.
>> >
>> > Checked on aarch64 (cross/native) and x86 with no issues.
>> >
>> > OK?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > James
>> >
>> > ---
>> > 2016-02-08  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
>> >
>> >         * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Add dump option, and gate
>> >         check on x86_64/i?86.
>> >
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: patch-test --]
[-- Type: application/octet-stream, Size: 667 bytes --]

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
index e575f6d..cc081bd 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-O3" } */
 /* { dg-additional-options "-mavx2" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
 
 #define N 256
@@ -16,4 +15,4 @@ void foo (int n)
       }
 }
 
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect"{ target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } } */

Re: [Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[Richard Biener]

On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:40 PM, James Greenhalgh
<james.greenhalgh@arm.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:29:31PM +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Thanks for reporting this issue.
>> I prepared slightly different patch since we don't need to add
>> tree-vect dump option - it is on by default for all tests in /vect
>> directory.
>
> Hm, I added that line as my test runs were showing:
>
>   UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: dump file does not exist
>
> I would guess the explicit
>
>   /* { dg-options "-O3" } */
>
> is clobbering the vect.exp setup of flags?

Yes.  Use { dg-additional-options "-O3" } instead.

> This also affects the x86-64 results H.J. Lu is sending out:
>
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-testresults/2016-02/msg00824.html
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
>>
>> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
>>
>> * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Gate dump with x86 target.
>>
>> 2016-02-08 16:07 GMT+03:00 James Greenhalgh <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > As far as I can tell, this testcase will only vectorize for x86_64/i?86
>> > targets, so it should be gated to only check for vectorization on those.
>> >
>> > Additionally, this test wants to scan the vectorizer dumps, so we ought
>> > to add -fdump-tree-vect-all to the options.
>> >
>> > Checked on aarch64 (cross/native) and x86 with no issues.
>> >
>> > OK?
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> > James
>> >
>> > ---
>> > 2016-02-08  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
>> >
>> >         * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Add dump option, and gate
>> >         check on x86_64/i?86.
>> >
>
>

Re: [Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[Jeff Law]

On 02/08/2016 06:07 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> As far as I can tell, this testcase will only vectorize for x86_64/i?86
> targets, so it should be gated to only check for vectorization on those.
>
> Additionally, this test wants to scan the vectorizer dumps, so we ought
> to add -fdump-tree-vect-all to the options.
>
> Checked on aarch64 (cross/native) and x86 with no issues.
>
> OK?
>
> Thanks,
> James
>
> ---
> 2016-02-08  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
>
> 	* gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Add dump option, and gate
> 	check on x86_64/i?86.
OK.

Thanks,
Jeff

Re: [Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[James Greenhalgh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1200 bytes --]


On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 03:24:14PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:40 PM, James Greenhalgh
> <james.greenhalgh@arm.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:29:31PM +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
> >> Hi James,
> >>
> >> Thanks for reporting this issue.
> >> I prepared slightly different patch since we don't need to add
> >> tree-vect dump option - it is on by default for all tests in /vect
> >> directory.
> >
> > Hm, I added that line as my test runs were showing:
> >
> >   UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: dump file does not exist
> >
> > I would guess the explicit
> >
> >   /* { dg-options "-O3" } */
> >
> > is clobbering the vect.exp setup of flags?
>
> Yes.  Use { dg-additional-options "-O3" } instead.

I don't see why this test needs anything more than the default vect
options anyway... In which case, the patch would look like this.

Tested on x86-64 where the test passes, and on AArch64 where it is
correctly skipped.

OK?

Thanks,
James

---
2016-02-09  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>

	* gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Drop dg-options directive,
	gate check on x86_64/i?86.


[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #2: 0001-Re-Patch-Gate-vect-mask-store-move-1.c-correctly-and.patch --]
[-- Type: text/x-patch;  name=0001-Re-Patch-Gate-vect-mask-store-move-1.c-correctly-and.patch, Size: 684 bytes --]

diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
index e575f6d..f5cae4f 100644
--- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
@@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
 /* { dg-do compile } */
-/* { dg-options "-O3" } */
 /* { dg-additional-options "-mavx2" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
 
 #define N 256
@@ -16,4 +15,4 @@ void foo (int n)
       }
 }
 
-/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" } } */
+/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } } */

Re: [Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[Richard Biener]

On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 12:24 PM, James Greenhalgh
<james.greenhalgh@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 03:24:14PM +0100, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 8, 2016 at 2:40 PM, James Greenhalgh
>> <james.greenhalgh@arm.com> wrote:
>> > On Mon, Feb 08, 2016 at 04:29:31PM +0300, Yuri Rumyantsev wrote:
>> >> Hi James,
>> >>
>> >> Thanks for reporting this issue.
>> >> I prepared slightly different patch since we don't need to add
>> >> tree-vect dump option - it is on by default for all tests in /vect
>> >> directory.
>> >
>> > Hm, I added that line as my test runs were showing:
>> >
>> >   UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: dump file does not exist
>> >
>> > I would guess the explicit
>> >
>> >   /* { dg-options "-O3" } */
>> >
>> > is clobbering the vect.exp setup of flags?
>>
>> Yes.  Use { dg-additional-options "-O3" } instead.
>
> I don't see why this test needs anything more than the default vect
> options anyway... In which case, the patch would look like this.
>
> Tested on x86-64 where the test passes, and on AArch64 where it is
> correctly skipped.
>
> OK?

Ok.

Richard.

> Thanks,
> James
>
> ---
> 2016-02-09  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
>
>         * gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Drop dg-options directive,
>         gate check on x86_64/i?86.
>

Re: [Patch] Gate vect-mask-store-move-1.c correctly, and actually output the dump

[Jakub Jelinek]

On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 11:24:57AM +0000, James Greenhalgh wrote:

Also tested on i686-linux (32-bit), where it previously FAILed too.

> 2016-02-09  James Greenhalgh  <james.greenhalgh@arm.com>
> 
> 	* gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c: Drop dg-options directive,
> 	gate check on x86_64/i?86.

Ok, thanks.

> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
> index e575f6d..f5cae4f 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/vect-mask-store-move-1.c
> @@ -1,5 +1,4 @@
>  /* { dg-do compile } */
> -/* { dg-options "-O3" } */
>  /* { dg-additional-options "-mavx2" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } */
>  
>  #define N 256
> @@ -16,4 +15,4 @@ void foo (int n)
>        }
>  }
>  
> -/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-tree-dump-times "Move stmt to created bb" 6 "vect" { target { i?86-*-* x86_64-*-* } } } } */


	Jakub