From: Richard Sandiford <richard.sandiford@arm.com>
To: Andrew Carlotti via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] aarch64: Move vreinterpret definitions into the compiler
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2022 07:52:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mptpmik2gr1.fsf@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AS8PR08MB6678EDE68DA5EDA5051A50FEF4BB9@AS8PR08MB6678.eurprd08.prod.outlook.com> (Andrew Carlotti via Gcc-patches's message of "Wed, 29 Jun 2022 12:32:36 +0000")
Sorry for the slow review.
Andrew Carlotti via Gcc-patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
> Hi,
>
> This removes a significant number of intrinsic definitions from the arm_neon.h
> header file, and reduces the amount of code duplication. The new macros and
> data structures are intended to also facilitate moving other intrinsic
> definitions out of the header file in future.
Nice.
> There is a a slight change in the behaviour of the bf16 vreinterpret intrinsics
> when compiling without bf16 support. Expressions like:
>
> b = vreinterpretq_s32_bf16(vreinterpretq_bf16_s64(a));
>
> are now compiled successfully, instead of causing a 'target specific option
> mismatch' during inlining.
Yeah. The ACLE says that these are conditional on +bf16, but no-one
seems to have a strong opinion about whether it needs to be that way.
Accepting them unconditionally makes them consistent with arm_sve.h.
Could you split out the part that adds V1DI? I never did understand
why we had V1DF but not V1DI, but neither one seemed obviously more
right than the other. Having the V1DI change as a separate patch
would help with bisecting and might help with later archaeology.
> @@ -523,6 +581,99 @@ static aarch64_simd_builtin_datum aarch64_simd_builtin_data[] = {
> FCMLA_LANEQ_BUILTIN (180, v4hf, fcmla_laneq, V4HF, true) \
> FCMLA_LANEQ_BUILTIN (270, v4hf, fcmla_laneq, V4HF, true) \
>
> +
> +/* vreinterpret intrinsics are defined for any pair of element types.
> + { _bf16 } { _bf16 } (if bf16 is supported)
Like you say, the bf16 alternatives are now unconditional, so it might
be better to remove "(if bf16 is supported)".
> + { _f16 _f32 _f64 } { _f16 _f32 _f64 }
> + { _s8 _s16 _s32 _s64 } x { _s8 _s16 _s32 _s64 }
> + { _u8 _u16 _u32 _u64 } { _u8 _u16 _u32 _u64 }
> + { _p8 _p16 _p64 } { _p8 _p16 _p64 }. */
> +#define VREINTERPRET_BUILTIN2(A, B) \
> + VREINTERPRET_BUILTIN (A, B, d)
> […]
> @@ -636,6 +804,22 @@ static aarch64_fcmla_laneq_builtin_datum aarch64_fcmla_lane_builtin_data[] = {
> AARCH64_SIMD_FCMLA_LANEQ_BUILTINS
> };
>
> +#undef VREINTERPRET_BUILTIN
> +#define VREINTERPRET_BUILTIN(A, B, L) \
> + {"vreinterpret" SIMD_INTR_LENGTH_CHAR(L) "_" #A "_" #B, \
> + AARCH64_SIMD_BUILTIN_VREINTERPRET##L##_##A##_##B, \
> + 2, \
> + { SIMD_INTR_MODE(A, L), SIMD_INTR_MODE(B, L) }, \
> + { SIMD_INTR_QUAL(A), SIMD_INTR_QUAL(B) }, \
> + FLAG_AUTO_FP, \
> + !strcmp(#A, #B) \
Could we instead use:
SIMD_INTR_MODE(A, L) == SIMD_INTR_MODE(B, L)
? That should be a definite compile-time constant. It should then
be possible to make…
> + },
> +
> +static aarch64_simd_intrinsic_datum aarch64_simd_intrinsic_data[] = {
> + AARCH64_SIMD_VREINTERPRET_BUILTINS
> +};
…this a static const array.
> +
> +
> #undef CRC32_BUILTIN
>
> static GTY(()) tree aarch64_builtin_decls[AARCH64_BUILTIN_MAX];
> @@ -1127,6 +1311,58 @@ aarch64_init_fcmla_laneq_builtins (void)
> }
> }
>
> +void
> +aarch64_init_simd_intrinsics (void)
> +{
> + unsigned int i = 0;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE (aarch64_simd_intrinsic_data); ++i)
> + {
> + aarch64_simd_intrinsic_datum* d = &aarch64_simd_intrinsic_data[i];
Making the type const would overflow this line, but using auto
would be OK.
> +
> + if (d->skip)
> + continue;
> +
> + tree return_type = void_type_node;
> + tree args = void_list_node;
> +
> + for (int op_num = d->op_count - 1; op_num >= 0; op_num--)
> + {
> + machine_mode op_mode = d->op_modes[op_num];
> + enum aarch64_type_qualifiers qualifiers = d->qualifiers[op_num];
> +
> + /* For pointers, we want a pointer to the basic type
> + of the vector. */
> + if (qualifiers & qualifier_pointer && VECTOR_MODE_P (op_mode))
> + op_mode = GET_MODE_INNER (op_mode);
> +
> + tree eltype = aarch64_simd_builtin_type
> + (op_mode,
> + (qualifiers & qualifier_unsigned) != 0,
> + (qualifiers & qualifier_poly) != 0);
> + gcc_assert (eltype != NULL);
> +
> + /* Add qualifiers. */
> + if (qualifiers & qualifier_const)
> + eltype = build_qualified_type (eltype, TYPE_QUAL_CONST);
> +
> + if (qualifiers & qualifier_pointer)
> + eltype = build_pointer_type (eltype);
Would be better to put this eltype stuff in a common subroutine
rather than duplicate it from aarch64_init_simd_builtin_functions.
> +
> + if (op_num == 0)
> + return_type = eltype;
> + else
> + args = tree_cons (NULL_TREE, eltype, args);
> + }
> +
> + tree ftype = build_function_type (return_type, args);
> + tree attrs = aarch64_get_attributes (FLAG_AUTO_FP, d->op_modes[0]);
> + unsigned int code = (d->fcode << AARCH64_BUILTIN_SHIFT | AARCH64_BUILTIN_GENERAL);
> + tree fndecl = simulate_builtin_function_decl (input_location, d->name, ftype, code, NULL, attrs);
Formatting nit: last two lines overflow the 80 character limit.
> + aarch64_builtin_decls[d->fcode] = fndecl;
> + }
> +}
> +
> void
> aarch64_init_simd_builtin_functions (bool called_from_pragma)
> {
> […]
> diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md
> index a00e1c6ef8d6b43d8b1a0fe4701e6b8c1f0f622f..a3f8f20e5fb20eeb9b9f48a27d83343638ba3c93 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md
> +++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64-simd.md
> @@ -8039,6 +8039,20 @@
> DONE;
> })
>
> +;; And same for V1DI (this should probably be merged with the above pattern)
Yes please :-)
E.g. maybe add a VQ_2E mode iterator as the 128-bit half of VP_2E,
and a V1HALF mode attributes that gives V1DI and V1DF (instead
of VHALF, which gives DI and DF).
Thanks,
Richard
> +(define_expand "vec_extractv2div1di"
> + [(match_operand:V1DI 0 "register_operand")
> + (match_operand:V2DI 1 "register_operand")
> + (match_operand 2 "immediate_operand")]
> + "TARGET_SIMD"
> +{
> + /* V1DI is rarely used by other patterns, so it should be better to hide
> + it in a subreg destination of a normal DI op. */
> + rtx scalar0 = gen_lowpart (DImode, operands[0]);
> + emit_insn (gen_vec_extractv2didi (scalar0, operands[1], operands[2]));
> + DONE;
> +})
> +
> ;; aes
>
> (define_insn "aarch64_crypto_aes<aes_op>v16qi"
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-05 6:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-29 12:32 Andrew Carlotti
2022-07-05 6:52 ` Richard Sandiford [this message]
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=mptpmik2gr1.fsf@arm.com \
--to=richard.sandiford@arm.com \
--cc=gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org \
/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).