From: "H.J. Lu" <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
To: "Cui,Lili" <lili.cui@intel.com>
Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
Hongtao Liu <hongtao.liu@intel.com>,
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Update {skylake,icelake,alderlake}_cost to add a bit preference to vector store.
Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2022 08:55:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMe9rOp_6-SEz0e6BEy2Raew+3mirjj5sn+LvhfkWHONUvhUkw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220601050606.3508-1-lili.cui@intel.com>
On Tue, May 31, 2022 at 10:06 PM Cui,Lili <lili.cui@intel.com> wrote:
>
> This patch is to update {skylake,icelake,alderlake}_cost to add a bit preference to vector store.
> Since the interger vector construction cost has changed, we need to adjust the load and store costs for intel processers.
>
> With the patch applied
> 538.imagic_r:gets ~6% improvement on ADL for multicopy.
> 525.x264_r :gets ~2% improvement on ADL and ICX for multicopy.
> with no measurable changes for other benchmarks.
>
> Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-linux-gnu{-m32,}. Ok for trunk?
>
> Thanks,
> Lili.
>
> gcc/ChangeLog
>
> PR target/105493
> * config/i386/x86-tune-costs.h (skylake_cost): Raise the gpr load cost
> from 4 to 6 and gpr store cost from 6 to 8. Change SSE loads and
> unaligned loads cost from {6, 6, 6, 10, 20} to {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}.
> (icelake_cost): Ditto.
> (alderlake_cost): Raise the gpr store cost from 6 to 8 and SSE loads,
> stores and unaligned stores cost from {6, 6, 6, 10, 15} to
> {8, 8, 8, 10, 15}.
>
> gcc/testsuite/
>
> PR target/105493
> * gcc.target/i386/pr91446.c: Adjust to expect vectorization
> * gcc.target/i386/pr99881.c: XFAIL.
> ---
> gcc/config/i386/x86-tune-costs.h | 26 ++++++++++++-------------
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr91446.c | 2 +-
> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr99881.c | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune-costs.h b/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune-costs.h
> index ea34a939c68..6c9066c84cc 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune-costs.h
> +++ b/gcc/config/i386/x86-tune-costs.h
> @@ -1897,15 +1897,15 @@ struct processor_costs skylake_cost = {
> 8, /* "large" insn */
> 17, /* MOVE_RATIO */
> 17, /* CLEAR_RATIO */
> - {4, 4, 4}, /* cost of loading integer registers
> + {6, 6, 6}, /* cost of loading integer registers
> in QImode, HImode and SImode.
> Relative to reg-reg move (2). */
> - {6, 6, 6}, /* cost of storing integer registers */
> - {6, 6, 6, 10, 20}, /* cost of loading SSE register
> + {8, 8, 8}, /* cost of storing integer registers */
> + {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}, /* cost of loading SSE register
> in 32bit, 64bit, 128bit, 256bit and 512bit */
> {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}, /* cost of storing SSE register
> in 32bit, 64bit, 128bit, 256bit and 512bit */
> - {6, 6, 6, 10, 20}, /* cost of unaligned loads. */
> + {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}, /* cost of unaligned loads. */
> {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}, /* cost of unaligned stores. */
> 2, 2, 4, /* cost of moving XMM,YMM,ZMM register */
> 6, /* cost of moving SSE register to integer. */
> @@ -2023,15 +2023,15 @@ struct processor_costs icelake_cost = {
> 8, /* "large" insn */
> 17, /* MOVE_RATIO */
> 17, /* CLEAR_RATIO */
> - {4, 4, 4}, /* cost of loading integer registers
> + {6, 6, 6}, /* cost of loading integer registers
> in QImode, HImode and SImode.
> Relative to reg-reg move (2). */
> - {6, 6, 6}, /* cost of storing integer registers */
> - {6, 6, 6, 10, 20}, /* cost of loading SSE register
> + {8, 8, 8}, /* cost of storing integer registers */
> + {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}, /* cost of loading SSE register
> in 32bit, 64bit, 128bit, 256bit and 512bit */
> {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}, /* cost of storing SSE register
> in 32bit, 64bit, 128bit, 256bit and 512bit */
> - {6, 6, 6, 10, 20}, /* cost of unaligned loads. */
> + {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}, /* cost of unaligned loads. */
> {8, 8, 8, 8, 16}, /* cost of unaligned stores. */
> 2, 2, 4, /* cost of moving XMM,YMM,ZMM register */
> 6, /* cost of moving SSE register to integer. */
> @@ -2146,13 +2146,13 @@ struct processor_costs alderlake_cost = {
> {6, 6, 6}, /* cost of loading integer registers
> in QImode, HImode and SImode.
> Relative to reg-reg move (2). */
> - {6, 6, 6}, /* cost of storing integer registers */
> - {6, 6, 6, 10, 15}, /* cost of loading SSE register
> + {8, 8, 8}, /* cost of storing integer registers */
> + {8, 8, 8, 10, 15}, /* cost of loading SSE register
> in 32bit, 64bit, 128bit, 256bit and 512bit */
> - {6, 6, 6, 10, 15}, /* cost of storing SSE register
> + {8, 8, 8, 10, 15}, /* cost of storing SSE register
> in 32bit, 64bit, 128bit, 256bit and 512bit */
> - {6, 6, 6, 10, 15}, /* cost of unaligned loads. */
> - {6, 6, 6, 10, 15}, /* cost of unaligned storess. */
> + {8, 8, 8, 10, 15}, /* cost of unaligned loads. */
> + {8, 8, 8, 10, 15}, /* cost of unaligned storess. */
> 2, 3, 4, /* cost of moving XMM,YMM,ZMM register */
> 6, /* cost of moving SSE register to integer. */
> 18, 6, /* Gather load static, per_elt. */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr91446.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr91446.c
> index 067bf43f698..0243ca3ea68 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr91446.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr91446.c
> @@ -21,4 +21,4 @@ foo (unsigned long long width, unsigned long long height,
> bar (&t);
> }
>
> -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "xmm\[0-9\]" 0 } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "vmovdqa\[^\n\r\]*xmm\[0-9\]" 2 } } */
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr99881.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr99881.c
> index a1ec1d1ba8a..3e087eb2ed7 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr99881.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr99881.c
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> /* PR target/99881. */
> /* { dg-do compile { target { ! ia32 } } } */
> /* { dg-options "-Ofast -march=skylake" } */
> -/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "xmm\[0-9\]" } } */
> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "xmm\[0-9\]" { xfail *-*-* } } } */
>
> void
> foo (int* __restrict a, int n, int c)
> --
> 2.17.1
>
Should we add some tests to verify improvements?
--
H.J.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-01 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-01 5:06 [PATCH] Update {skylake, icelake, alderlake}_cost " Cui,Lili
2022-06-01 15:55 ` H.J. Lu [this message]
2022-06-06 5:25 ` [PATCH] Update {skylake,icelake,alderlake}_cost " Hongtao Liu
2022-06-08 3:44 ` Cui, Lili
2022-06-09 7:01 ` Hongtao Liu
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=CAMe9rOp_6-SEz0e6BEy2Raew+3mirjj5sn+LvhfkWHONUvhUkw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=hongtao.liu@intel.com \
--cc=lili.cui@intel.com \
--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).