* [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Enable overlap-by-pieces in case of fast unaliged access @ 2021-07-22 22:41 Christoph Muellner 2022-05-25 0:55 ` Vineet Gupta 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Christoph Muellner @ 2021-07-22 22:41 UTC (permalink / raw) To: gcc-patches Cc: Jim Wilson, Kito Cheng, Palmer Dabbelt, rjiejie, Christoph Muellner This patch enables the overlap-by-pieces feature of the by-pieces infrastructure for inlining builtins in case the target has set riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p to false. An example to demonstrate the effect for targets with fast unaligned access (target's that have slow_unaligned_access set to false) is the code that is generated for "memset (p, 0, 15);", where the alignment of p is unknown: Without overlap_op_by_pieces we get: 8e: 00053023 sd zero,0(a0) 92: 00052423 sw zero,8(a0) 96: 00051623 sh zero,12(a0) 9a: 00050723 sb zero,14(a0) With overlap_op_by_pieces we get: 7e: 00053023 sd zero,0(a0) 82: 000533a3 sd zero,7(a0) gcc/ChangeLog: * config/riscv/riscv.c (riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces): New function. (TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P): Connect to riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces. gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c: New test. * gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h: New test. Signed-off-by: Christoph Muellner <cmuellner@gcc.gnu.org> --- gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c | 11 +++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c | 10 ++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c | 10 ++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c | 10 ++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c | 10 ++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c | 11 +++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c | 13 +++++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c | 11 +++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c | 11 +++++++++++ .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c | 10 ++++++++++ gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ 11 files changed, 123 insertions(+) create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c index 576960bb37c..98c76ba657a 100644 --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c @@ -5201,6 +5201,14 @@ riscv_slow_unaligned_access (machine_mode, unsigned int) return riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p; } +/* Implement TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P. */ + +static bool +riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces (void) +{ + return !riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p; +} + /* Implement TARGET_CAN_CHANGE_MODE_CLASS. */ static bool @@ -5525,6 +5533,9 @@ riscv_asan_shadow_offset (void) #undef TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS #define TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS riscv_slow_unaligned_access +#undef TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P +#define TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces + #undef TARGET_SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED #define TARGET_SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED riscv_secondary_memory_needed diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..ca51fff0fc6 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMSET0_N(7) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,0" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,3" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..24b5b254658 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMSET0_N(11) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,7" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..636031cb944 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMSET0_N(13) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,5" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..15d77860050 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMSET0_N(15) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,7" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..faccb301f84 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMCPY_N(7) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "lw" 2 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 2 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..51e9b37ba5a --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMCPY_N(11) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "lw" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 1 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..44fdaa398ca --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMCPY_N(13) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 2 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd" 2 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..61186ae09a2 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMCPY_N(15) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 2 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd" 2 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..5d06c6eea08 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64 -mstrict-align" } */ +/* { dg-do compile } */ + +#include "builtins.h" + +DO_MEMSET0_N(15) + +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sb\tzero" 15 } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sw" } } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sd" } } */ diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..22b2800d464 --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ +#ifndef BUILTINS_H +#define BUILTINS_H + +#define DO_MEMSET0_N(N) \ +void do_memset0_##N (void *p) \ +{ \ + __builtin_memset (p, 0, N); \ +} + +#define DO_MEMCPY_N(N) \ +void do_memcpy_##N (void *d, void *s) \ +{ \ + __builtin_memcpy (d, s, N); \ +} + +#endif /* BUILTINS_H */ -- 2.31.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Enable overlap-by-pieces in case of fast unaliged access 2021-07-22 22:41 [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Enable overlap-by-pieces in case of fast unaliged access Christoph Muellner @ 2022-05-25 0:55 ` Vineet Gupta 2022-05-25 1:32 ` Palmer Dabbelt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Vineet Gupta @ 2022-05-25 0:55 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Christoph Muellner, gcc-patches; +Cc: Kito Cheng, rjiejie, Palmer Dabbelt On 7/22/21 15:41, Christoph Muellner via Gcc-patches wrote: > This patch enables the overlap-by-pieces feature of the by-pieces > infrastructure for inlining builtins in case the target has set > riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p to false. > > An example to demonstrate the effect for targets with fast unaligned > access (target's that have slow_unaligned_access set to false) is > the code that is generated for "memset (p, 0, 15);", where the > alignment of p is unknown: > > Without overlap_op_by_pieces we get: > 8e: 00053023 sd zero,0(a0) > 92: 00052423 sw zero,8(a0) > 96: 00051623 sh zero,12(a0) > 9a: 00050723 sb zero,14(a0) > > With overlap_op_by_pieces we get: > 7e: 00053023 sd zero,0(a0) > 82: 000533a3 sd zero,7(a0) > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * config/riscv/riscv.c (riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces): New function. > (TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P): Connect to > riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces. > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c: New test. > * gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h: New test. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Muellner <cmuellner@gcc.gnu.org> Ping, IMO this needs to be (re)considered for trunk. This goes really nicely with riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p==false, to elide the unrolled tail copies for trailer word/sword/byte accesses. @Kito, @Palmer ? Just from codegen pov this seems to be a no brainer foo: sd zero,0(a0) sw zero,8(a0) sh zero,12(a0) sb zero,14(a0) vs. sd zero,0(a0) sd zero,7(a0) -Vineet > --- > gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c | 11 +++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c | 10 ++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c | 10 ++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c | 10 ++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c | 10 ++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c | 11 +++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c | 13 +++++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c | 11 +++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c | 11 +++++++++++ > .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c | 10 ++++++++++ > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > 11 files changed, 123 insertions(+) > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h > > diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c > index 576960bb37c..98c76ba657a 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c > +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c > @@ -5201,6 +5201,14 @@ riscv_slow_unaligned_access (machine_mode, unsigned int) > return riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p; > } > > +/* Implement TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P. */ > + > +static bool > +riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces (void) > +{ > + return !riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p; > +} > + > /* Implement TARGET_CAN_CHANGE_MODE_CLASS. */ > > static bool > @@ -5525,6 +5533,9 @@ riscv_asan_shadow_offset (void) > #undef TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS > #define TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS riscv_slow_unaligned_access > > +#undef TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P > +#define TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces > + > #undef TARGET_SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED > #define TARGET_SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED riscv_secondary_memory_needed > > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..ca51fff0fc6 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c > @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMSET0_N(7) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,0" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,3" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..24b5b254658 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c > @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMSET0_N(11) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,7" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..636031cb944 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c > @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMSET0_N(13) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,5" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..15d77860050 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c > @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMSET0_N(15) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,7" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..faccb301f84 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c > @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMCPY_N(7) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "lw" 2 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 2 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..51e9b37ba5a > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c > @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMCPY_N(11) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "lw" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 1 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..44fdaa398ca > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c > @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMCPY_N(13) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 2 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd" 2 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..61186ae09a2 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c > @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMCPY_N(15) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 2 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd" 2 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..5d06c6eea08 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c > @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64 -mstrict-align" } */ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > + > +#include "builtins.h" > + > +DO_MEMSET0_N(15) > + > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sb\tzero" 15 } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sw" } } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sd" } } */ > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..22b2800d464 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h > @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ > +#ifndef BUILTINS_H > +#define BUILTINS_H > + > +#define DO_MEMSET0_N(N) \ > +void do_memset0_##N (void *p) \ > +{ \ > + __builtin_memset (p, 0, N); \ > +} > + > +#define DO_MEMCPY_N(N) \ > +void do_memcpy_##N (void *d, void *s) \ > +{ \ > + __builtin_memcpy (d, s, N); \ > +} > + > +#endif /* BUILTINS_H */ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Enable overlap-by-pieces in case of fast unaliged access 2022-05-25 0:55 ` Vineet Gupta @ 2022-05-25 1:32 ` Palmer Dabbelt 2022-05-25 1:36 ` Vineet Gupta 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Palmer Dabbelt @ 2022-05-25 1:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vineet Gupta; +Cc: cmuellner, gcc-patches, Kito Cheng, rjiejie On Tue, 24 May 2022 17:55:24 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote: > > > On 7/22/21 15:41, Christoph Muellner via Gcc-patches wrote: >> This patch enables the overlap-by-pieces feature of the by-pieces >> infrastructure for inlining builtins in case the target has set >> riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p to false. >> >> An example to demonstrate the effect for targets with fast unaligned >> access (target's that have slow_unaligned_access set to false) is >> the code that is generated for "memset (p, 0, 15);", where the >> alignment of p is unknown: >> >> Without overlap_op_by_pieces we get: >> 8e: 00053023 sd zero,0(a0) >> 92: 00052423 sw zero,8(a0) >> 96: 00051623 sh zero,12(a0) >> 9a: 00050723 sb zero,14(a0) >> >> With overlap_op_by_pieces we get: >> 7e: 00053023 sd zero,0(a0) >> 82: 000533a3 sd zero,7(a0) >> >> gcc/ChangeLog: >> >> * config/riscv/riscv.c (riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces): New function. >> (TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P): Connect to >> riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces. >> >> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: >> >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c: New test. >> * gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h: New test. >> >> Signed-off-by: Christoph Muellner <cmuellner@gcc.gnu.org> > > Ping, IMO this needs to be (re)considered for trunk. > This goes really nicely with riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p==false, to > elide the unrolled tail copies for trailer word/sword/byte accesses. > > @Kito, @Palmer ? Just from codegen pov this seems to be a no brainer Has anything changed since this was posted? IIRC the discussion essentially boiled down to that overlapping store likely being a hard case on in-order machines (like the C906), but there weren't any benchmarks or documentation so we could figure that out. I don't see how this is an obvious win: sure it's fewer ops (and assuming a uniform distribution fewer misaligned accesses, though I don't know how reasonable uniform distributions are here), but it's only a small upside so that hard case would have to be fast in order for this to be better code. If someone has benchmarks showing these are actually faster on the C906 (or even some documentation describing how these accesses are handled) then I'm happy to take the code (with the -Os bit fixed). It shouldn't be all that hard of a benchmark to run... > foo: > sd zero,0(a0) > sw zero,8(a0) > sh zero,12(a0) > sb zero,14(a0) > > vs. > > sd zero,0(a0) > sd zero,7(a0) > > -Vineet > >> --- >> gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c | 11 +++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c | 10 ++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c | 10 ++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c | 10 ++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c | 10 ++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c | 11 +++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c | 13 +++++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c | 11 +++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c | 11 +++++++++++ >> .../gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c | 10 ++++++++++ >> gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++ >> 11 files changed, 123 insertions(+) >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c >> create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h >> >> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c >> index 576960bb37c..98c76ba657a 100644 >> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c >> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv.c >> @@ -5201,6 +5201,14 @@ riscv_slow_unaligned_access (machine_mode, unsigned int) >> return riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p; >> } >> >> +/* Implement TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P. */ >> + >> +static bool >> +riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces (void) >> +{ >> + return !riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p; >> +} >> + >> /* Implement TARGET_CAN_CHANGE_MODE_CLASS. */ >> >> static bool >> @@ -5525,6 +5533,9 @@ riscv_asan_shadow_offset (void) >> #undef TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS >> #define TARGET_SLOW_UNALIGNED_ACCESS riscv_slow_unaligned_access >> >> +#undef TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P >> +#define TARGET_OVERLAP_OP_BY_PIECES_P riscv_overlap_op_by_pieces >> + >> #undef TARGET_SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED >> #define TARGET_SECONDARY_MEMORY_NEEDED riscv_secondary_memory_needed >> >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..ca51fff0fc6 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-1.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMSET0_N(7) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,0" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,3" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..24b5b254658 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-2.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMSET0_N(11) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw\tzero,7" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..636031cb944 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-3.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMSET0_N(13) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,5" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..15d77860050 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-4.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMSET0_N(15) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,0" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd\tzero,7" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..faccb301f84 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-5.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMCPY_N(7) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "lw" 2 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 2 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..51e9b37ba5a >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-6.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,13 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMCPY_N(11) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "lw" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sw" 1 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..44fdaa398ca >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-7.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMCPY_N(13) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 2 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd" 2 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..61186ae09a2 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-overlap-8.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,11 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMCPY_N(15) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "ld" 2 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sd" 2 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "lb" } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sb" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..5d06c6eea08 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins-strict-align.c >> @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ >> +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mtune=thead-c906 -march=rv64gc -mabi=lp64 -mstrict-align" } */ >> +/* { dg-do compile } */ >> + >> +#include "builtins.h" >> + >> +DO_MEMSET0_N(15) >> + >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "sb\tzero" 15 } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sw" } } */ >> +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sd" } } */ >> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h >> new file mode 100644 >> index 00000000000..22b2800d464 >> --- /dev/null >> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/builtins.h >> @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ >> +#ifndef BUILTINS_H >> +#define BUILTINS_H >> + >> +#define DO_MEMSET0_N(N) \ >> +void do_memset0_##N (void *p) \ >> +{ \ >> + __builtin_memset (p, 0, N); \ >> +} >> + >> +#define DO_MEMCPY_N(N) \ >> +void do_memcpy_##N (void *d, void *s) \ >> +{ \ >> + __builtin_memcpy (d, s, N); \ >> +} >> + >> +#endif /* BUILTINS_H */ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Enable overlap-by-pieces in case of fast unaliged access 2022-05-25 1:32 ` Palmer Dabbelt @ 2022-05-25 1:36 ` Vineet Gupta 2022-05-25 1:47 ` Palmer Dabbelt 0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread From: Vineet Gupta @ 2022-05-25 1:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Palmer Dabbelt; +Cc: cmuellner, gcc-patches, Kito Cheng, rjiejie On 5/24/22 18:32, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >> >> Ping, IMO this needs to be (re)considered for trunk. >> This goes really nicely with riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p==false, to >> elide the unrolled tail copies for trailer word/sword/byte accesses. >> >> @Kito, @Palmer ? Just from codegen pov this seems to be a no brainer > > Has anything changed since this was posted? > > IIRC the discussion essentially boiled down to that overlapping store > likely being a hard case on in-order machines (like the C906), but > there weren't any benchmarks or documentation so we could figure that > out. I don't see how this is an obvious win: sure it's fewer ops (and > assuming a uniform distribution fewer misaligned accesses, though I > don't know how reasonable uniform distributions are here), but it's > only a small upside so that hard case would have to be fast in order > for this to be better code. > > If someone has benchmarks showing these are actually faster on the > C906 (or even some documentation describing how these accesses are > handled) then I'm happy to take the code (with the -Os bit fixed). It > shouldn't be all that hard of a benchmark to run... Will this be acceptable, if this was a per cpu knob then ? There seem to be existing OoO RV cores too ! > >> foo: >> sd zero,0(a0) >> sw zero,8(a0) >> sh zero,12(a0) >> sb zero,14(a0) >> >> vs. >> >> sd zero,0(a0) >> sd zero,7(a0) >> >> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Enable overlap-by-pieces in case of fast unaliged access 2022-05-25 1:36 ` Vineet Gupta @ 2022-05-25 1:47 ` Palmer Dabbelt 0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread From: Palmer Dabbelt @ 2022-05-25 1:47 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Vineet Gupta; +Cc: cmuellner, gcc-patches, Kito Cheng, rjiejie On Tue, 24 May 2022 18:36:27 PDT (-0700), Vineet Gupta wrote: > > > On 5/24/22 18:32, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: >>> >>> Ping, IMO this needs to be (re)considered for trunk. >>> This goes really nicely with riscv_slow_unaligned_access_p==false, to >>> elide the unrolled tail copies for trailer word/sword/byte accesses. >>> >>> @Kito, @Palmer ? Just from codegen pov this seems to be a no brainer >> >> Has anything changed since this was posted? >> >> IIRC the discussion essentially boiled down to that overlapping store >> likely being a hard case on in-order machines (like the C906), but >> there weren't any benchmarks or documentation so we could figure that >> out. I don't see how this is an obvious win: sure it's fewer ops (and >> assuming a uniform distribution fewer misaligned accesses, though I >> don't know how reasonable uniform distributions are here), but it's >> only a small upside so that hard case would have to be fast in order >> for this to be better code. >> >> If someone has benchmarks showing these are actually faster on the >> C906 (or even some documentation describing how these accesses are >> handled) then I'm happy to take the code (with the -Os bit fixed). It >> shouldn't be all that hard of a benchmark to run... > > Will this be acceptable, if this was a per cpu knob then ? There seem to > be existing OoO RV cores too ! It's being added as a per-cpu knob, it's just only being turned on for the C906 and -Os tunings where it's not obviously a win. I'm certainly not saying nobody builds this flavor of machine, certainly Intel does as it's on for their machines, just that there's no solid evidence the C906 behaves this way. Given that this flag had been explicitly discussed not to include generating misaligned accesses on purpose during the Os discussions, I don't want to just flip it over on a vendor and risk a performance regression. The only other pipeline models are for in-order SiFive processors that trap into M-mode for unaligned accesses, so this sort of thing doesn't apply (though it's part of the reason -Os doesn't do this, as they're still pretty common). > >> >>> foo: >>> sd zero,0(a0) >>> sw zero,8(a0) >>> sh zero,12(a0) >>> sb zero,14(a0) >>> >>> vs. >>> >>> sd zero,0(a0) >>> sd zero,7(a0) >>> >>> ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-05-25 1:47 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2021-07-22 22:41 [PATCH v2] RISC-V: Enable overlap-by-pieces in case of fast unaliged access Christoph Muellner 2022-05-25 0:55 ` Vineet Gupta 2022-05-25 1:32 ` Palmer Dabbelt 2022-05-25 1:36 ` Vineet Gupta 2022-05-25 1:47 ` Palmer Dabbelt
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).