From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp-out2.suse.de (smtp-out2.suse.de [IPv6:2001:67c:2178:6::1d]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE6773858417 for ; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 09:50:48 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org CE6773858417 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 CE6773858417 Authentication-Results: server2.sourceware.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=2001:67c:2178:6::1d ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1699264250; cv=none; b=tSVFX00KPU5IRjrdB0sTnYanhjReKCARNxPUgbggCYYQg/u5HTRBHcXJGeU20nmKLaDIwmPRZzaLAtz4O+UlAMkh+Gvncv507lGfU1B719NEFcJsxaqr8DTdluyYW/cF7toBe5ymTGhlypctu/u5FxTsG087mw3CSkp+TsOU67s= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=sourceware.org; s=key; t=1699264250; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YpiVL1TzYazBklKS/zlQuSVhf0dmXxoIpopfIKEWhe8=; h=DKIM-Signature:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID: MIME-Version; b=iAv9P+OTjGz2zA6+K6nOoVRLKiFyPPSQaCNC68fVWj0POTk4G07q26U0T/2osfY/20eifomuPw6UuTtDNxwFMNVC8/SnhwOGqpybmmOwfJcDk+jFZkkotDj4f2U9LLq7sPLniWNIEGfve6D9Ua/IjAUGglL9LsebVuMMQynq2U4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; server2.sourceware.org Received: from relay2.suse.de (relay2.suse.de [149.44.160.134]) by smtp-out2.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D90E91F45A; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 09:50:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_rsa; t=1699264247; 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=sSRxQyvHbDB5PMJU9MyXm72lCIeLKgNqJLr5/hpZ5p4=; b=KAj+z5EvfjhQUY/sjQ1uZCo10Ov67gNibE2iJx3e6WMkeNPfn/W5/k2x1KfDmP6+2XhD8V 22KS5V3OQL50vvNRQ9FB8XP0A1mvBpZewkeYWc5SrW6eKyCHIKni+bMlvQ4niQu8CfqOHY UU7k1qNrn/5Q5mVgpVKrWCp5rY35PXI= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.de; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1699264247; 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=sSRxQyvHbDB5PMJU9MyXm72lCIeLKgNqJLr5/hpZ5p4=; b=alo443IEpvTX4vm8qQxPAPS23I0LkcHI9tO7mFJBx/VNa73OYpgqLBe6eUC5QE0TOJ2nAd WgL4rMnetD9t46Dg== 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 939BC2C2C4; Mon, 6 Nov 2023 09:50:47 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2023 09:50:47 +0000 (UTC) From: Richard Biener To: Andrew Stubbs cc: "Andre Vieira (lists)" , "gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org" , Richard Sandiford , "jakub@redhat.com" Subject: Re: [RFC] vect: disable multiple calls of poly simdclones In-Reply-To: <2172ef1b-7ea4-4250-8249-04b57c5f4a6e@codesourcery.com> Message-ID: References: <91d3f8ee-8b2c-4866-a3ed-beb2953b5438@arm.com> <2172ef1b-7ea4-4250-8249-04b57c5f4a6e@codesourcery.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 Mon, 6 Nov 2023, Andrew Stubbs wrote: > > > On 06/11/2023 07:52, Richard Biener wrote: > > 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. > > What does "non-constant simdclones" mean? I'm not sure if this is a thing that > can happen on GCN, or not? simdclone with a variable (POLY_INT) vector size. Richard.