From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1c]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EE9F3857715 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 07:52:58 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 2EE9F3857715 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.de Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=suse.de ARC-Filter: OpenARC Filter v1.0.0 sourceware.org 2EE9F3857715 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2001:67c:2178:6::1c ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1699257179; cv=none; b=rrzwfse68OWJtmV6CwwTrESmZL77iCnN0gU/3ztLrLSEBn641gjzrMrraHGyIteOuvFpXdn3+yS7wiLVb9ViIeeCM6VVgfvXIQqUbhDau8qVCUk59vNUqFCIvdRLLCzuXMydWowQjcF0BqAJvDE+H4mP+/YD4IF9F9Q86lYLmtw= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1699257179; c=relaxed/simple; bh=z7JvjUvPsVNUEGTkutBDfahqYVyUEFWzcjaJNn+b83g=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID: MIME-Version; b=M8/t3dg9YErNTPhU06L74HGXDMqhXym1JuP0ahgdNxux4Dbzbv+OhhjVw749QyVVmKgarZGrMp84x7H8Gw6PECSTztrKNJLfJ4TnftPXJrYpNoifbt+MgbaWG3xGjAm1HHpjf/GFwF4g6EtmVPCvaAMoxPJfGYdd/D+9G/jJNzg= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B3EC21845; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 07:52:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1699257177; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Fq+IhmCKp5QFpKZNq4nPMpHaL93kJLlFedi9Y968las=; b=JUxBQgTVkcTbchsAYM1ysUfZnsOhaVYxvLqO8e53MmL7l21JTLEdNO7ddBPyADBj16yyBZ 7Stbjk6aoE5A+DLmEehPCp0Y076LfLe4S/BLJuI4EwdTtjHntu50R/6lZeLd46ygXD0mXd cLzZXloQ0XkiTEU0zaHN+rCDUz8pqy0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1699257177; h=from:from:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc: mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Fq+IhmCKp5QFpKZNq4nPMpHaL93kJLlFedi9Y968las=; b=PxFFlnFmq+7FTS00Akucb0z8J2j3u+YauzgMngaNB3sQR2pajlyrlnEi0s6hB/g1RW9ehB gQkoYmcz8p4GZaDA== Received: from wotan.suse.de (wotan.suse.de [10.160.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by relay2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B20BD2D3F9; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 07:52:56 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2023 07:52:56 +0000 (UTC) From: Richard Biener To: "Andre Vieira (lists)" cc: "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Richard Sandiford , "jakub@redhat.com" , ams@codesourcery.com Subject: Re: [RFC] vect: disable multiple calls of poly simdclones In-Reply-To: <91d3f8ee-8b2c-4866-a3ed-beb2953b5438@arm.com> Message-ID: References: <91d3f8ee-8b2c-4866-a3ed-beb2953b5438@arm.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (LSU 394 2020-01-19) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On Fri, 3 Nov 2023, Andre Vieira (lists) wrote: > Hi, > > The current codegen code to support VF's that are multiples of a simdclone > simdlen rely on BIT_FIELD_REF to create multiple input vectors. This does not > work for non-constant simdclones, so we should disable using such clones when > the VF is a multiple of the non-constant simdlen until we change the codegen > to support those. > > Enabling SVE simdclone support will cause ICEs if the vectorizer decides to > use a SVE simdclone with a VF that is larger than the simdlen. I'll be away > for the next two weeks, so cant' really discuss this further. > I initially tried to solve the problem, but the way > vectorizable_simd_clone_call is structured doesn't make it easy to replace > BIT_FIELD_REF with the poly-suitable solution right now of using > unpack_{hi,lo}. I think it should be straight-forward to use unpack_{even,odd} (it's even/odd for VLA, right? If lo/hi would be possible then doing BIT_FIELD_REF would be, too? Also you need to have multiple stages of unpack/pack when the factor is more than 2). There's plenty of time even during stage3 to address this. At least your patch should have come with a testcase (or two). Is there a bugreport tracking this issue? It should affect GCN as well I guess. Richard. > Unfortunately I only found this now as I was adding further > tests for SVE :( > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > * tree-vect-stmts.cc (vectorizable_simd_clone_call): Reject simdclones > with non-constant simdlen when VF is not exactly the same.