maxjhandsome
/
llvm-project
forked from OSchip/llvm-project
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Releases Wiki Activity
llvm-project/llvm/lib/Target/X86/X86PfmCounters.td

Ignoring revisions in .git-blame-ignore-revs. Click here to bypass and see the normal blame view.

236 lines
10 KiB
TableGen
Raw Normal View History

[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
//===-- X86PfmCounters.td - X86 Hardware Counters ----------*- tablegen -*-===//
//
Update the file headers across all of the LLVM projects in the monorepo to reflect the new license. We understand that people may be surprised that we're moving the header entirely to discuss the new license. We checked this carefully with the Foundation's lawyer and we believe this is the correct approach. Essentially, all code in the project is now made available by the LLVM project under our new license, so you will see that the license headers include that license only. Some of our contributors have contributed code under our old license, and accordingly, we have retained a copy of our old license notice in the top-level files in each project and repository. llvm-svn: 351636
2019-01-19 16:50:56 +08:00
// Part of the LLVM Project, under the Apache License v2.0 with LLVM Exceptions.
// See https://llvm.org/LICENSE.txt for license information.
// SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 WITH LLVM-exception
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
//
// This describes the available hardware counters for various subtargets.
//
//===----------------------------------------------------------------------===//
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter : PfmCounter<"unhalted_core_cycles">;
def UopsIssuedPfmCounter : PfmCounter<"uops_issued:any">;
[llvm-exegesis][NFC] Add a way to declare the default counter binding for unbound CPUs for a target. Summary: This simplifies the code and moves everything to tablegen for consistency. This also prepares the ground for adding issue counters. Reviewers: gchatelet, john.brawn, jsji Subscribers: nemanjai, mgorny, javed.absar, kbarton, tschuett, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54297 llvm-svn: 346489
2018-11-09 21:15:32 +08:00
// No default counters on X86.
def DefaultPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {}
def : PfmCountersDefaultBinding<DefaultPfmCounters>;
[X86] Improve pfm counter coverage for llvm-exegesis This patch attempts to improve pfm perf counter coverage for all the x86 CPUs that libpfm4 supports. Intel/AMD CPU families tend to share names for cycle/uops counters so even if they don't have a scheduler model yet they can at least use the default values (checked against the libpfm4 source code). The remaining CPUs (where their port/pipe resource counters are known) I've tried to add to the existing model mappings. These are untested but don't represent a regression to current llvm-exegesis behaviour for these CPUs. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55432 llvm-svn: 348617
2018-12-08 01:48:40 +08:00
// Intel X86 Counters.
def PentiumPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = PfmCounter<"cpu_clk_unhalted">;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"uops_retired">;
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"pentiumpro", PentiumPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"pentium2", PentiumPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"pentium3", PentiumPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"pentium3m", PentiumPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"pentium-m", PentiumPfmCounters>;
def CorePfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"uops_retired:any">;
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"yonah", CorePfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"prescott", CorePfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"core2", CorePfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"penryn", CorePfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"nehalem", CorePfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"corei7", CorePfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"westmere", CorePfmCounters>;
def AtomPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"uops_retired:any">;
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"bonnell", AtomPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"atom", AtomPfmCounters>;
def SLMPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"uops_retired:any">;
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"silvermont", SLMPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"goldmont", SLMPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"goldmont-plus", SLMPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"tremont", SLMPfmCounters>;
[X86] Extend pfm counter coverage for llvm-exegesis Extension to rL348617, turns out llvm-exegesis doesn't need to match the perf counter name against a scheduler model resource name - so I've added a few more counters that I could find in the libpfm4 source code (and fix a typo in the knl/knm retired_uops counter - which uses 'all' instead of 'any'). llvm-svn: 348721
2018-12-09 21:45:15 +08:00
def KnightPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"uops_retired:all">;
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"knl", KnightPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"knm", KnightPfmCounters>;
[X86] Improve pfm counter coverage for llvm-exegesis This patch attempts to improve pfm perf counter coverage for all the x86 CPUs that libpfm4 supports. Intel/AMD CPU families tend to share names for cycle/uops counters so even if they don't have a scheduler model yet they can at least use the default values (checked against the libpfm4 source code). The remaining CPUs (where their port/pipe resource counters are known) I've tried to add to the existing model mappings. These are untested but don't represent a regression to current llvm-exegesis behaviour for these CPUs. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55432 llvm-svn: 348617
2018-12-08 01:48:40 +08:00
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def SandyBridgePfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = UopsIssuedPfmCounter;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"SBPort0", "uops_dispatched_port:port_0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SBPort1", "uops_dispatched_port:port_1">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SBPort23", "uops_dispatched_port:port_2 + uops_dispatched_port:port_3">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SBPort4", "uops_dispatched_port:port_4">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SBPort5", "uops_dispatched_port:port_5">
];
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
}
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"sandybridge", SandyBridgePfmCounters>;
[X86] Add ivybridge to llvm-exegesis PFM counter mappings llvm-svn: 348575
2018-12-07 17:27:35 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"ivybridge", SandyBridgePfmCounters>;
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def HaswellPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = UopsIssuedPfmCounter;
let IssueCounters = [
[llvm-exegesis] Fix pfm counter names for Haswell for older versions of libpfm The inconsistency caused uops mode to fail on an older version of libpfm since the dispatched_port was added as an alias for executed_port only after v4.6.0 of libpfm. Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71665
2019-12-19 19:52:15 +08:00
PfmIssueCounter<"HWPort0", "uops_executed_port:port_0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"HWPort1", "uops_executed_port:port_1">,
PfmIssueCounter<"HWPort2", "uops_executed_port:port_2">,
PfmIssueCounter<"HWPort3", "uops_executed_port:port_3">,
PfmIssueCounter<"HWPort4", "uops_executed_port:port_4">,
PfmIssueCounter<"HWPort5", "uops_executed_port:port_5">,
PfmIssueCounter<"HWPort6", "uops_executed_port:port_6">,
PfmIssueCounter<"HWPort7", "uops_executed_port:port_7">
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
];
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
}
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"haswell", HaswellPfmCounters>;
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def BroadwellPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = UopsIssuedPfmCounter;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"BWPort0", "uops_executed_port:port_0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"BWPort1", "uops_executed_port:port_1">,
PfmIssueCounter<"BWPort2", "uops_executed_port:port_2">,
PfmIssueCounter<"BWPort3", "uops_executed_port:port_3">,
PfmIssueCounter<"BWPort4", "uops_executed_port:port_4">,
PfmIssueCounter<"BWPort5", "uops_executed_port:port_5">,
PfmIssueCounter<"BWPort6", "uops_executed_port:port_6">,
PfmIssueCounter<"BWPort7", "uops_executed_port:port_7">
];
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
}
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"broadwell", BroadwellPfmCounters>;
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def SkylakeClientPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = UopsIssuedPfmCounter;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"SKLPort0", "uops_dispatched_port:port_0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKLPort1", "uops_dispatched_port:port_1">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKLPort2", "uops_dispatched_port:port_2">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKLPort3", "uops_dispatched_port:port_3">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKLPort4", "uops_dispatched_port:port_4">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKLPort5", "uops_dispatched_port:port_5">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKLPort6", "uops_dispatched_port:port_6">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKLPort7", "uops_dispatched_port:port_7">
];
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
}
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"skylake", SkylakeClientPfmCounters>;
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def SkylakeServerPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = UnhaltedCoreCyclesPfmCounter;
let UopsCounter = UopsIssuedPfmCounter;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"SKXPort0", "uops_dispatched_port:port_0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKXPort1", "uops_dispatched_port:port_1">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKXPort2", "uops_dispatched_port:port_2">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKXPort3", "uops_dispatched_port:port_3">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKXPort4", "uops_dispatched_port:port_4">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKXPort5", "uops_dispatched_port:port_5">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKXPort6", "uops_dispatched_port:port_6">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SKXPort7", "uops_dispatched_port:port_7">
];
[MC][TableGen] Add optional libpfm counter names for ProcResUnits. Summary: Subtargets can define the libpfm counter names that can be used to measure cycles and uops issued on ProcResUnits. This allows making llvm-exegesis available on more targets. Fixes PR36984. Reviewers: gchatelet, RKSimon, andreadb, craig.topper Subscribers: llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D45360 llvm-svn: 329675
2018-04-10 16:16:37 +08:00
}
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"skylake-avx512", SkylakeServerPfmCounters>;
[X86] Improve pfm counter coverage for llvm-exegesis This patch attempts to improve pfm perf counter coverage for all the x86 CPUs that libpfm4 supports. Intel/AMD CPU families tend to share names for cycle/uops counters so even if they don't have a scheduler model yet they can at least use the default values (checked against the libpfm4 source code). The remaining CPUs (where their port/pipe resource counters are known) I've tried to add to the existing model mappings. These are untested but don't represent a regression to current llvm-exegesis behaviour for these CPUs. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55432 llvm-svn: 348617
2018-12-08 01:48:40 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"cascadelake", SkylakeServerPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"cannonlake", SkylakeServerPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"icelake-client", SkylakeServerPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"icelake-server", SkylakeServerPfmCounters>;
// AMD X86 Counters.
// Set basic counters for AMD cpus that we know libpfm4 supports.
def DefaultAMDPfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = PfmCounter<"cpu_clk_unhalted">;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"retired_uops">;
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"athlon", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"athlon-tbird", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"athlon-4", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"athlon-xp", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"athlon-mp", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"k8", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"opteron", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"athlon64", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"athlon-fx", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"k8-sse3", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"opteron-sse3", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"athlon64-sse3", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"amdfam10", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"barcelona", DefaultAMDPfmCounters>;
[X86][BtVer2] Added Jaguar cpu cycle counter to permit llvm-exegesis latency testing Ideally we'd be able to test a CPU by using __builtin_readcyclecounter()/RDTSC instead (PR37193) if a model/cycle-counter is not specified. NOTE: Jaguar PMCs don't give good coverage of resource pipes specified in the model (at the macro-vs-micro-op levels) but we should be able to cover at least a few resources. llvm-svn: 333190
2018-05-24 22:54:32 +08:00
AMD BdVer2 (Piledriver) Initial Scheduler model Summary: # Overview This is somewhat partial. * Latencies are good {F7371125} * All of these remaining inconsistencies //appear// to be noise/noisy/flaky. * NumMicroOps are somewhat good {F7371158} * Most of the remaining inconsistencies are from `Ld` / `Ld_ReadAfterLd` classes * Actual unit occupation (pipes, `ResourceCycles`) are undiscovered lands, i did not really look there. They are basically verbatum copy from `btver2` * Many `InstRW`. And there are still inconsistencies left... To be noted: I think this is the first new schedule profile produced with the new next-gen tools like llvm-exegesis! # Benchmark I realize that isn't what was suggested, but i'll start with some "internal" public real-world benchmark i understand - [[ https://github.com/darktable-org/rawspeed | RawSpeed raw image decoding library ]]. Diff (the exact clang from trunk without/with this patch): ``` Comparing /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-old/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench to /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-new/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench Benchmark Time CPU Time Old Time New CPU Old CPU New ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0607 -0.0604 234 219 233 219 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0630 -0.0626 233 219 233 219 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2581 +0.2587 1 2 1 2 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0770 -0.0767 144 133 144 133 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0767 -0.0763 144 133 144 133 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4170 -0.4156 1 0 1 0 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0271 -0.0270 463 450 463 450 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0093 -0.0093 453 449 453 449 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7280 -0.7280 13 4 13 4 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0004 0.0004 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0065 -0.0065 569 565 569 565 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0077 -0.0077 569 564 569 564 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0077 +1.0068 2 5 2 5 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0220 0.0199 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0006 +0.0007 312 312 312 312 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0031 +0.0032 311 312 311 312 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7069 -0.7072 4 1 4 1 Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0004 0.0004 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0015 -0.0015 141 141 141 141 Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0010 -0.0011 141 141 141 141 Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.1486 -0.1456 0 0 0 0 Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.6139 0.8766 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0008 -0.0005 60 60 60 60 Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0006 -0.0002 60 60 60 60 Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.1467 -0.1390 0 0 0 0 Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0137 0.0137 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0002 +0.0002 275 275 275 275 Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0015 -0.0014 275 275 275 275 Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +3.3687 +3.3587 0 2 0 2 Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.4041 0.3933 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0004 +0.0004 67 67 67 67 Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0000 -0.0000 67 67 67 67 Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.1947 +0.1995 0 0 0 0 Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0074 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0092 +0.0074 547 542 25 25 Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0054 +0.0115 544 541 25 25 Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4086 -0.3486 8 5 0 0 Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.3320 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0015 +0.0204 218 218 12 12 Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0001 +0.0203 218 218 12 12 Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2259 +0.2023 1 1 0 0 GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0209 -0.0179 96 94 90 88 GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0182 -0.0155 95 93 90 88 GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.6164 -0.2703 2 1 2 1 Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0098 -0.0098 176 175 176 175 Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0126 -0.0126 176 174 176 174 Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_stddev +6.9789 +6.9157 0 2 0 2 Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0237 -0.0238 474 463 474 463 Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0267 -0.0267 473 461 473 461 Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.7179 +0.7178 3 5 3 5 Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.6837 0.6554 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0014 -0.0013 1375 1373 1375 1373 Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0018 +0.0019 1371 1374 1371 1374 Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7457 -0.7382 11 3 10 3 Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0080 -0.0289 22 22 10 10 Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0070 -0.0287 22 22 10 10 Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0977 +0.6614 0 0 0 0 Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0132 +0.0967 35 36 10 11 Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0132 +0.0956 35 36 10 11 Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0407 -0.1695 0 0 0 0 Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0331 +0.1307 13 13 6 6 Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0430 +0.1373 12 13 6 6 Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.9006 -0.8847 1 0 0 0 Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0016 0.0010 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0023 -0.0024 395 394 395 394 Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0029 -0.0030 395 394 395 393 Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0275 -0.0375 1 1 1 1 Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0232 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0047 +0.0039 114 113 28 28 Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0050 +0.0037 114 113 28 28 Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0599 -0.2683 1 1 0 0 Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0206 +0.0207 405 414 405 414 Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0204 +0.0205 405 414 405 414 Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2155 +0.2212 1 1 1 1 Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0109 -0.0108 147 145 147 145 Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0104 -0.0103 147 145 147 145 Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4919 -0.4800 0 0 0 0 Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0149 -0.0147 220 217 220 217 Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0173 -0.0169 221 217 220 217 Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0337 +1.0341 1 3 1 3 Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0001 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0019 -0.0019 194 193 194 193 Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0021 -0.0021 194 193 194 193 Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4441 -0.4282 0 0 0 0 Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.4263 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0258 -0.0006 81 83 19 19 Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0235 -0.0011 81 82 19 19 Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.1634 +0.1070 1 1 0 0 ``` {F7443905} If we look at the `_mean`s, the time column, the biggest win is `-7.7%` (`Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2`), and the biggest loose is `+3.3%` (`Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2`); Overall: mean `-0.7436%`, median `-0.23%`, `cbrt(sum(time^3))` = `-8.73%` Looks good so far i'd say. llvm-exegesis details: {F7371117} {F7371125} {F7371128} {F7371144} {F7371158} Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, andreadb, courbet, avt77, spatel, GGanesh Reviewed By: andreadb Subscribers: javed.absar, gbedwell, jfb, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52779 llvm-svn: 345463
2018-10-28 04:46:30 +08:00
def BdVer2PfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = PfmCounter<"cpu_clk_unhalted">;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"retired_uops">;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"PdFPU0", "dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_pipe0 + dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_dual_pipe0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"PdFPU1", "dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_pipe1 + dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_dual_pipe1">,
PfmIssueCounter<"PdFPU2", "dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_pipe2 + dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_dual_pipe2">,
PfmIssueCounter<"PdFPU3", "dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_pipe3 + dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_dual_pipe3">
];
}
[X86] Improve pfm counter coverage for llvm-exegesis This patch attempts to improve pfm perf counter coverage for all the x86 CPUs that libpfm4 supports. Intel/AMD CPU families tend to share names for cycle/uops counters so even if they don't have a scheduler model yet they can at least use the default values (checked against the libpfm4 source code). The remaining CPUs (where their port/pipe resource counters are known) I've tried to add to the existing model mappings. These are untested but don't represent a regression to current llvm-exegesis behaviour for these CPUs. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55432 llvm-svn: 348617
2018-12-08 01:48:40 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"bdver1", BdVer2PfmCounters>;
AMD BdVer2 (Piledriver) Initial Scheduler model Summary: # Overview This is somewhat partial. * Latencies are good {F7371125} * All of these remaining inconsistencies //appear// to be noise/noisy/flaky. * NumMicroOps are somewhat good {F7371158} * Most of the remaining inconsistencies are from `Ld` / `Ld_ReadAfterLd` classes * Actual unit occupation (pipes, `ResourceCycles`) are undiscovered lands, i did not really look there. They are basically verbatum copy from `btver2` * Many `InstRW`. And there are still inconsistencies left... To be noted: I think this is the first new schedule profile produced with the new next-gen tools like llvm-exegesis! # Benchmark I realize that isn't what was suggested, but i'll start with some "internal" public real-world benchmark i understand - [[ https://github.com/darktable-org/rawspeed | RawSpeed raw image decoding library ]]. Diff (the exact clang from trunk without/with this patch): ``` Comparing /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-old/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench to /home/lebedevri/rawspeed/build-new/src/utilities/rsbench/rsbench Benchmark Time CPU Time Old Time New CPU Old CPU New ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0607 -0.0604 234 219 233 219 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0630 -0.0626 233 219 233 219 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/09.canon.sraw1.cr2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2581 +0.2587 1 2 1 2 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0770 -0.0767 144 133 144 133 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0767 -0.0763 144 133 144 133 Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4170 -0.4156 1 0 1 0 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0271 -0.0270 463 450 463 450 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0093 -0.0093 453 449 453 449 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9927.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7280 -0.7280 13 4 13 4 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0004 0.0004 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0065 -0.0065 569 565 569 565 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0077 -0.0077 569 564 569 564 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9928.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0077 +1.0068 2 5 2 5 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0220 0.0199 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0006 +0.0007 312 312 312 312 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0031 +0.0032 311 312 311 312 Canon/EOS 5DS/2K4A9929.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7069 -0.7072 4 1 4 1 Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0004 0.0004 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0015 -0.0015 141 141 141 141 Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0010 -0.0011 141 141 141 141 Canon/EOS 10D/CRW_7673.CRW/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.1486 -0.1456 0 0 0 0 Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.6139 0.8766 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0008 -0.0005 60 60 60 60 Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0006 -0.0002 60 60 60 60 Canon/EOS 40D/_MG_0154.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.1467 -0.1390 0 0 0 0 Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0137 0.0137 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0002 +0.0002 275 275 275 275 Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0015 -0.0014 275 275 275 275 Canon/EOS 77D/IMG_4049.CR2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +3.3687 +3.3587 0 2 0 2 Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.4041 0.3933 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0004 +0.0004 67 67 67 67 Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0000 -0.0000 67 67 67 67 Canon/PowerShot G1/crw_1693.crw/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.1947 +0.1995 0 0 0 0 Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0074 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0092 +0.0074 547 542 25 25 Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0054 +0.0115 544 541 25 25 Fujifilm/GFX 50S/20170525_0037TEST.RAF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4086 -0.3486 8 5 0 0 Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.3320 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0015 +0.0204 218 218 12 12 Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0001 +0.0203 218 218 12 12 Fujifilm/X-Pro2/_DSF3051.RAF/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2259 +0.2023 1 1 0 0 GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0209 -0.0179 96 94 90 88 GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0182 -0.0155 95 93 90 88 GoPro/HERO6 Black/GOPR9172.GPR/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.6164 -0.2703 2 1 2 1 Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0098 -0.0098 176 175 176 175 Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0126 -0.0126 176 174 176 174 Kodak/DCS Pro 14nx/D7465857.DCR/threads:8/real_time_stddev +6.9789 +6.9157 0 2 0 2 Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0237 -0.0238 474 463 474 463 Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0267 -0.0267 473 461 473 461 Nikon/D850/Nikon-D850-14bit-lossless-compressed.NEF/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.7179 +0.7178 3 5 3 5 Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.6837 0.6554 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0014 -0.0013 1375 1373 1375 1373 Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0018 +0.0019 1371 1374 1371 1374 Olympus/E-M1MarkII/Olympus_EM1mk2__HIRES_50MP.ORF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.7457 -0.7382 11 3 10 3 Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0080 -0.0289 22 22 10 10 Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0070 -0.0287 22 22 10 10 Panasonic/DC-G9/P1000476.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0977 +0.6614 0 0 0 0 Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0132 +0.0967 35 36 10 11 Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0132 +0.0956 35 36 10 11 Panasonic/DC-GH5/_T012014.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0407 -0.1695 0 0 0 0 Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0331 +0.1307 13 13 6 6 Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0430 +0.1373 12 13 6 6 Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.9006 -0.8847 1 0 0 0 Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0016 0.0010 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0023 -0.0024 395 394 395 394 Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0029 -0.0030 395 394 395 393 Pentax/645Z/IMGP2837.PEF/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0275 -0.0375 1 1 1 1 Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0232 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0047 +0.0039 114 113 28 28 Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0050 +0.0037 114 113 28 28 Phase One/P65/CF027310.IIQ/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.0599 -0.2683 1 1 0 0 Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0206 +0.0207 405 414 405 414 Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0204 +0.0205 405 414 405 414 Samsung/NX1/2016-07-23-142101_sam_9364.srw/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.2155 +0.2212 1 1 1 1 Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0109 -0.0108 147 145 147 145 Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0104 -0.0103 147 145 147 145 Samsung/NX30/2015-03-07-163604_sam_7204.srw/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4919 -0.4800 0 0 0 0 Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.0000 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0149 -0.0147 220 217 220 217 Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0173 -0.0169 221 217 220 217 Samsung/NX3000/_3184416.SRW/threads:8/real_time_stddev +1.0337 +1.0341 1 3 1 3 Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0001 0.0001 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_mean -0.0019 -0.0019 194 193 194 193 Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_median -0.0021 -0.0021 194 193 194 193 Sony/DSLR-A350/DSC05472.ARW/threads:8/real_time_stddev -0.4441 -0.4282 0 0 0 0 Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_pvalue 0.0000 0.4263 U Test, Repetitions: 25 vs 25 Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_mean +0.0258 -0.0006 81 83 19 19 Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_median +0.0235 -0.0011 81 82 19 19 Sony/ILCE-7RM2/14-bit-compressed.ARW/threads:8/real_time_stddev +0.1634 +0.1070 1 1 0 0 ``` {F7443905} If we look at the `_mean`s, the time column, the biggest win is `-7.7%` (`Canon/EOS 5D Mark II/10.canon.sraw2.cr2`), and the biggest loose is `+3.3%` (`Panasonic/DC-GH5S/P1022085.RW2`); Overall: mean `-0.7436%`, median `-0.23%`, `cbrt(sum(time^3))` = `-8.73%` Looks good so far i'd say. llvm-exegesis details: {F7371117} {F7371125} {F7371128} {F7371144} {F7371158} Reviewers: craig.topper, RKSimon, andreadb, courbet, avt77, spatel, GGanesh Reviewed By: andreadb Subscribers: javed.absar, gbedwell, jfb, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52779 llvm-svn: 345463
2018-10-28 04:46:30 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"bdver2", BdVer2PfmCounters>;
[X86] Extend pfm counter coverage for llvm-exegesis Extension to rL348617, turns out llvm-exegesis doesn't need to match the perf counter name against a scheduler model resource name - so I've added a few more counters that I could find in the libpfm4 source code (and fix a typo in the knl/knm retired_uops counter - which uses 'all' instead of 'any'). llvm-svn: 348721
2018-12-09 21:45:15 +08:00
def BdVer3PfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = PfmCounter<"cpu_clk_unhalted">;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"retired_uops">;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"SrFPU0", "dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_pipe0 + dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_dual_pipe0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SrFPU1", "dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_pipe1 + dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_dual_pipe1">,
PfmIssueCounter<"SrFPU2", "dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_pipe2 + dispatched_fpu_ops:ops_dual_pipe2">
];
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"bdver3", BdVer3PfmCounters>;
def : PfmCountersBinding<"bdver4", BdVer3PfmCounters>;
def BtVer1PfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = PfmCounter<"cpu_clk_unhalted">;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"retired_uops">;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"BtFPU0", "dispatched_fpu:pipe0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"BtFPU1", "dispatched_fpu:pipe1">
];
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"btver1", BtVer1PfmCounters>;
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def BtVer2PfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = PfmCounter<"cpu_clk_unhalted">;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"retired_uops">;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"JFPU0", "dispatched_fpu:pipe0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"JFPU1", "dispatched_fpu:pipe1">
];
[X86][BtVer2] Added Jaguar cpu cycle counter to permit llvm-exegesis latency testing Ideally we'd be able to test a CPU by using __builtin_readcyclecounter()/RDTSC instead (PR37193) if a model/cycle-counter is not specified. NOTE: Jaguar PMCs don't give good coverage of resource pipes specified in the model (at the macro-vs-micro-op levels) but we should be able to cover at least a few resources. llvm-svn: 333190
2018-05-24 22:54:32 +08:00
}
[MCSched] Bind PFM Counters to the CPUs instead of the SchedModel. Summary: The pfm counters are now in the ExegesisTarget rather than the MCSchedModel (PR39165). This also compresses the pfm counter tables (PR37068). Reviewers: RKSimon, gchatelet Subscribers: mgrang, llvm-commits Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52932 llvm-svn: 345243
2018-10-25 15:44:01 +08:00
def : PfmCountersBinding<"btver2", BtVer2PfmCounters>;
[X86] Improve pfm counter coverage for llvm-exegesis This patch attempts to improve pfm perf counter coverage for all the x86 CPUs that libpfm4 supports. Intel/AMD CPU families tend to share names for cycle/uops counters so even if they don't have a scheduler model yet they can at least use the default values (checked against the libpfm4 source code). The remaining CPUs (where their port/pipe resource counters are known) I've tried to add to the existing model mappings. These are untested but don't represent a regression to current llvm-exegesis behaviour for these CPUs. Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D55432 llvm-svn: 348617
2018-12-08 01:48:40 +08:00
def ZnVer1PfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = PfmCounter<"cycles_not_in_halt">;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"retired_uops">;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"ZnFPU0", "fpu_pipe_assignment:total0">,
PfmIssueCounter<"ZnFPU1", "fpu_pipe_assignment:total1">,
PfmIssueCounter<"ZnFPU2", "fpu_pipe_assignment:total2">,
PfmIssueCounter<"ZnFPU3", "fpu_pipe_assignment:total3">,
PfmIssueCounter<"ZnDivider", "div_op_count">
];
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"znver1", ZnVer1PfmCounters>;
[llvm-exegesis] Add pfm counters for Zen2 (znver2). Summary: There are no counters for individual ports, but this is already enough to find a lot of issues in the current model (upcoming patch). Reviewers: dblaikie, gchatelet Subscribers: hiraditya, tschuett, RKSimon, llvm-commits Tags: #llvm Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D72032
2019-12-31 18:28:40 +08:00
def ZnVer2PfmCounters : ProcPfmCounters {
let CycleCounter = PfmCounter<"cycles_not_in_halt">;
let UopsCounter = PfmCounter<"retired_uops">;
let IssueCounters = [
PfmIssueCounter<"Zn2AGU", "ls_dispatch:ld_dispatch + ls_dispatch:store_dispatch">,
PfmIssueCounter<"Zn2Divider", "div_op_count">
];
}
def : PfmCountersBinding<"znver2", ZnVer2PfmCounters>;