From: "Li, Pan2" <pan2.li@intel.com>
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>,
Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>,
"juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai" <juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai>,
richard.sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>,
gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>,
palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>, jakub <jakub@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from 8-bit to 16-bit
Date: Tue, 9 May 2023 06:13:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <MW5PR11MB5908F9D058A67FE5D0F38799A9769@MW5PR11MB5908.namprd11.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <MW5PR11MB590809F50314F492D81E3D38A9719@MW5PR11MB5908.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Update the memory allocated bytes for both the all 12-bits patch and code 8-bits + mode 16-bits.
Bytes allocated with O2:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark | upstream | with the all 12-bits patch | with 8 bits code and 16 bits mode patch
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
400.perlbench | 25286185160 | 25286590847 ~0.0% | 25286927562 ~0.0%
401.bzip2 | 1429883731 | 1430373103 ~0.0% | 1430401245 ~0.0%
403.gcc | 55023568981 | 55027574220 ~0.0% | 55028727683 ~0.0%
429.mcf | 1360975660 | 1360959361 ~0.0% | 1360960745 ~0.0%
445.gobmk | 12791636502 | 12789648370 ~0.0% | 12789919097 ~0.0%
456.hmmer | 9354433652 | 9353899089 ~0.0% | 9353990523 ~0.0%
458.sjeng | 1991260562 | 1991107773 ~0.0% | 1991153851 ~0.0%
462.libquantum | 1725112078 | 1724972077 ~0.0% | 1724983726 ~0.0%
464.h264ref | 8597673515 | 8597748172 ~0.0% | 8597931771 ~0.0%
471.omnetpp | 37613034778 | 37614346380 ~0.0% | 37614470890 ~0.0%
473.astar | 3817295518 | 3817226365 ~0.0% | 3817239631 ~0.0%
483.xalancbmk | 149418776991 | 149405214817 ~0.0% | 149405744428 ~0.0%
Bytes allocated with Ofast + funroll-loops:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark | upstream | with the all 12-bits patch | with 8 bits code and 16 bits mode patch
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
400.perlbench | 30438407499 | 30568217795 +0.4% | 30568869401 +0.4%
401.bzip2 | 2277114519 | 2318588280 +1.8% | 2318659896 +1.8%
403.gcc | 64499664264 | 64764400606 +0.4% | 64766107560 +0.4%
429.mcf | 1361486758 | 1399872438 +2.8% | 1399876436 +2.8%
445.gobmk | 15258056111 | 15392769408 +0.9% | 15393305108 +0.9%
456.hmmer | 10896615649 | 10934649010 +0.3% | 10934858994 +0.4%
458.sjeng | 2592620709 | 2641551464 +1.9% | 2641641389 +1.9%
462.libquantum | 1814487525 | 1856446214 +2.3% | 1856475555 +2.3%
464.h264ref | 13528736878 | 13606989269 +0.6% | 13607467432 +0.6%
471.omnetpp | 38721066702 | 38908678658 +0.5% | 38908940169 +0.5%
473.astar | 3924015756 | 3967867190 +1.1% | 3967897551 +1.1%
483.xalancbmk | 165897692838 | 166818255397 +0.6% | 166819397831 +0.6%
Pan
-----Original Message-----
From: Li, Pan2
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 4:06 PM
To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Cc: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>; Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>; juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai; richard.sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>; gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>; jakub <jakub@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from 8-bit to 16-bit
After the bits patch like below.
rtx_def code 16 => 8 bits.
rtx_def mode 8 => 16 bits.
tree_base code unchanged.
The structure layout of both the rtx_def and tree_base will be something similar as below. As I understand, the lower 8-bits of tree_base will be inspected when 'dv' is a tree for the rtx conversion.
tree_base rtx_def
code: 16 code: 8
side_effects_flag: 1 mode: 16
constant_flag: 1
addressable_flag: 1
volatile_flag: 1
readonly_flag: 1
asm_written_flag: 1
nowarning_flag: 1
visited: 1
used_flag: 1
nothrow_flag: 1
static_flag: 1
public_flag: 1
private_flag: 1
protected_flag: 1
deprecated_flag: 1
default_def_flag: 1
I have a try a similar approach (as below) as you mentioned, aka shrink tree_code as 1:1 overlap to rtx_code. And completed one memory allocated bytes test in another email.
rtx_def code 16 => 12 bits.
rtx_def mode 8 => 12 bits.
tree_base code 16 => 12 bits.
Pan
-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 3:38 PM
To: Li, Pan2 <pan2.li@intel.com>
Cc: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>; Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>; juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai; richard.sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>; gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>; jakub <jakub@redhat.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from 8-bit to 16-bit
On Mon, 8 May 2023, Li, Pan2 wrote:
> return !dv || (int) GET_CODE ((rtx) dv) != (int) VALUE; } is able to
> fix this ICE after mode bits change.
Can you check which bits this will inspect when 'dv' is a tree after your patch? VALUE is 1 and would map to IDENTIFIER_NODE on the tree side when there was a 1:1 overlap.
I think for all cases but struct loc_exp_dep we could find a bit to record wheter we deal with a VALUE or a decl, but for loc_exp_dep it's going to be difficult (unless we start to take bits from pointer representations).
That said, I agree with Jeff that the code is ugly, but a simplistic conversion isn't what we want.
An alternative "solution" might be to also shrink tree_code when we shrink rtx_code and keep the 1:1 overlap.
Richard.
> I will re-trigger the memory allocate bytes test with below changes
> for X86.
>
> rtx_def code 16 => 8 bits.
> rtx_def mode 8 => 16 bits.
> tree_base code unchanged.
>
> Pan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Li, Pan2
> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 2:42 PM
> To: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>; Jeff Law
> <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
> Cc: Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>; juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai;
> richard.sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>; gcc-patches
> <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>; jakub
> <jakub@redhat.com>
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from
> 8-bit to 16-bit
>
> Oops. Actually I am patching a version as you mentioned like storage allocation. Thank you Richard, will try your suggestion and keep you posted.
>
> Pan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
> Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 2:30 PM
> To: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
> Cc: Li, Pan2 <pan2.li@intel.com>; Kito Cheng <kito.cheng@gmail.com>;
> juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai; richard.sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>;
> gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; palmer <palmer@dabbelt.com>;
> jakub <jakub@redhat.com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] machine_mode type size: Extend enum size from
> 8-bit to 16-bit
>
> On Sun, 7 May 2023, Jeff Law wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On 5/6/23 19:55, Li, Pan2 wrote:
> > > It looks like we cannot simply swap the code and mode in rtx_def,
> > > the code may have to be the same bits as the tree_code in tree_base.
> > > Or we will meet ICE like below.
> > >
> > > rtx_def code 16 => 8 bits.
> > > rtx_def mode 8 => 16 bits.
> > >
> > > static inline decl_or_value
> > > dv_from_value (rtx value)
> > > {
> > > decl_or_value dv;
> > > dv = value;
> > > gcc_checking_assert (dv_is_value_p (dv)); <= ICE
> > > return dv;
> > Ugh. We really just need to fix this code. It assumes particular
> > structure layouts and that's just wrong/dumb.
>
> Well, it's a neat trick ... we just need to adjust it to
>
> static inline bool
> dv_is_decl_p (decl_or_value dv)
> {
> return !dv || (int) GET_CODE ((rtx) dv) != (int) VALUE; }
>
> I think (and hope for the 'decl' case the bits inspected are never 'VALUE'). Of course the above stinks from a TBAA perspective ...
>
> Any "real" fix would require allocating storage for a discriminator and thus hurt the resource constrained var-tracking a lot.
>
> Richard.
>
--
Richard Biener <rguenther@suse.de>
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH, Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg, Germany; GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew Myers, Andrew McDonald, Boudien Moerman; HRB 36809 (AG Nuernberg)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-09 6:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 63+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-10 14:48 juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 14:54 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 15:02 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 15:14 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 9:16 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-11 9:46 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 10:11 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-11 10:25 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 10:52 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-11 9:46 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-11 9:59 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-11 10:11 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 10:05 ` Richard Earnshaw
2023-04-11 10:15 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-11 10:59 ` Richard Biener
2023-04-11 11:11 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-11 11:19 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 13:50 ` Kito Cheng
2023-04-12 7:53 ` Richard Biener
2023-04-12 9:06 ` Kito Cheng
2023-04-12 9:21 ` Richard Biener
2023-04-12 9:31 ` Kito Cheng
2023-04-12 23:22 ` 钟居哲
2023-04-13 13:06 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-04-13 14:02 ` Richard Biener
2023-04-15 2:58 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2023-04-17 6:38 ` Richard Biener
2023-04-20 5:37 ` Hans-Peter Nilsson
2023-05-05 1:43 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-05 6:25 ` Richard Biener
2023-05-06 1:10 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-06 1:53 ` Kito Cheng
2023-05-06 1:59 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-05-06 2:12 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-06 2:18 ` Kito Cheng
2023-05-06 2:20 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-06 2:48 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-07 1:55 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-07 15:23 ` Jeff Law
2023-05-08 1:07 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-08 6:29 ` Richard Biener
2023-05-08 6:41 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-08 6:59 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-08 7:37 ` Richard Biener
2023-05-08 8:05 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-09 6:13 ` Li, Pan2 [this message]
2023-05-09 7:04 ` Richard Biener
2023-05-09 10:16 ` Richard Sandiford
2023-05-09 10:26 ` Richard Biener
2023-05-09 11:50 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-10 5:09 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-10 7:22 ` Li, Pan2
2023-05-08 1:35 ` Li, Pan2
2023-04-10 15:18 ` Jakub Jelinek
2023-04-10 15:22 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 20:42 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 23:03 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-11 1:36 ` juzhe.zhong
[not found] ` <20230410232205400970205@rivai.ai>
2023-04-10 15:33 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 20:39 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 20:36 ` Jeff Law
2023-04-10 22:53 ` juzhe.zhong
2023-04-10 15:10 ` Jakub Jelinek
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=MW5PR11MB5908F9D058A67FE5D0F38799A9769@MW5PR11MB5908.namprd11.prod.outlook.com \
--to=pan2.li@intel.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=jakub@redhat.com \
--cc=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=juzhe.zhong@rivai.ai \
--cc=kito.cheng@gmail.com \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=rguenther@suse.de \
--cc=richard.sandiford@arm.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).