From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 81929 invoked by alias); 9 Jan 2019 16:10:31 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 81917 invoked by uid 89); 9 Jan 2019 16:10:30 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=1.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,KAM_LAZY_DOMAIN_SECURITY,KAM_SHORT,LIKELY_SPAM_BODY,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=no version=3.3.2 spammy=0.05, 005, 99.95, SQRT X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Jan 2019 16:10:28 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E47DB28123; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 16:10:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ovpn-116-42.phx2.redhat.com (ovpn-116-42.phx2.redhat.com [10.3.116.42]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B0F660C45; Wed, 9 Jan 2019 16:10:26 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1547050225.7788.129.camel@redhat.com> Subject: Re: autovectorization in gcc From: David Malcolm To: Jonathan Wakely , Andrew Haley Cc: Kyrill Tkachov , "Kay F. Jahnke" , "gcc@gcc.gnu.org" Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2019 16:10:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: References: <41ea83cd-0ce8-4f25-35e5-888513d69c7b@gmail.com> <5C35C2C2.1050106@foss.arm.com> <2721bb39-ee4b-0202-d81d-e0b36d2059fa@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-01/txt/msg00060.txt.bz2 On Wed, 2019-01-09 at 09:56 +0000, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On Wed, 9 Jan 2019 at 09:50, Andrew Haley wrote: > > I don't agree. Sometimes vectorization is critical. It would be > > nice > > to have a warning which would fire if vectorization failed. That > > would > > surely help the OP. > > Dave Malcolm has been working on something like that: > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2018-09/msg01749.html Yes: this code is in trunk for gcc 9, but it doesn't help much for the case given elsewhere in this thread: #include extern float data [ 32768 ] ; extern void vf1() { #pragma vectorize enable for ( int i = 0 ; i < 32768 ; i++ ) data [ i ] = std::sqrt ( data [ i ] ) ; } Compiling on this x86_64 box with -fopt-info-vec-missed shows the rather cryptic: g++ -c /tmp/sqrt-test.cc -O3 -mavx2 -fopt-info-vec-missed /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: couldn't vectorize loop /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: not vectorized: control flow in loop. /home/david/coding/gcc-python/gcc-svn-trunk/install-dogfood/include/c++/9.0.0/cmath:464:27: missed: statement clobbers memory: __builtin_sqrtf (_1); and with -fopt-info-vec-all-internals shows: g++ -c /tmp/sqrt-test.cc -O3 -mavx2 -fopt-info-vec-all-internals Analyzing loop at /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8 /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: note: === analyze_loop_nest === /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: note: === vect_analyze_loop_form === /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: not vectorized: control flow in loop. /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: bad loop form. /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: couldn't vectorize loop /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: not vectorized: control flow in loop. /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:5:13: note: vectorized 0 loops in function. /home/david/coding/gcc-python/gcc-svn-trunk/install-dogfood/include/c++/9.0.0/cmath:464:27: note: === vect_slp_analyze_bb === /home/david/coding/gcc-python/gcc-svn-trunk/install-dogfood/include/c++/9.0.0/cmath:464:27: note: === vect_analyze_data_refs === /home/david/coding/gcc-python/gcc-svn-trunk/install-dogfood/include/c++/9.0.0/cmath:464:27: note: got vectype for stmt: _1 = data[i_12]; vector(8) float /home/david/coding/gcc-python/gcc-svn-trunk/install-dogfood/include/c++/9.0.0/cmath:464:27: missed: not vectorized: not enough data-refs in basic block. /home/david/coding/gcc-python/gcc-svn-trunk/install-dogfood/include/c++/9.0.0/cmath:464:27: missed: statement clobbers memory: __builtin_sqrtf (_1); /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: note: === vect_slp_analyze_bb === /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: note: === vect_analyze_data_refs === /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: note: got vectype for stmt: data[i_12] = _7; vector(8) float /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:8:24: missed: not vectorized: not enough data-refs in basic block. /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:10:1: note: === vect_slp_analyze_bb === /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:10:1: note: === vect_analyze_data_refs === /tmp/sqrt-test.cc:10:1: missed: not vectorized: not enough data-refs in basic block. I had to turn on -fdump-tree-all to try to figure out what that "control flow in loop" was; it seems to be a guard against the input to value being negative: [local count: 1063004407]: # i_12 = PHI <0(2), i_6(7)> # ivtmp_10 = PHI <32768(2), ivtmp_2(7)> # DEBUG i => i_12 # DEBUG BEGIN_STMT _1 = data[i_12]; # DEBUG __x => _1 # DEBUG BEGIN_STMT _7 = .SQRT (_1); if (_1 u>= 0.0) goto ; [99.95%] else goto ; [0.05%] [local count: 1062472912]: goto ; [100.00%] [local count: 531495]: __builtin_sqrtf (_1); I'm not sure where that control flow came from: it isn't in sqrt-test.cc.104t.stdarg but is in sqrt-test.cc.105t.cdce so I think it's coming from the argument-range code in cdce. Arguably the location on the statement is wrong: it's on the loop header, when it presumably should be on the std::sqrt call. Shall I file a bugzilla about this? Dave