2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; NOTE: Assertions have been autogenerated by utils/update_llc_test_checks.py
|
|
|
|
; RUN: llc < %s -x86-use-vzeroupper -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mattr=+avx | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=ALL --check-prefix=VZ --check-prefix=AVX
|
|
|
|
; RUN: llc < %s -x86-use-vzeroupper -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mattr=+avx512f | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=ALL --check-prefix=VZ --check-prefix=AVX512
|
2019-11-05 02:20:00 +08:00
|
|
|
; RUN: llc < %s -x86-use-vzeroupper -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mattr=+avx,-vzeroupper | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=ALL --check-prefix=NO-VZ --check-prefix=DISABLE-VZ
|
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
|
|
|
; RUN: llc < %s -x86-use-vzeroupper -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mcpu=bdver2 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=ALL --check-prefix=NO-VZ --check-prefix=BDVER2
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; RUN: llc < %s -x86-use-vzeroupper -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mcpu=btver2 | FileCheck %s --check-prefix=ALL --check-prefix=NO-VZ --check-prefix=BTVER2
|
2011-08-23 09:14:17 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2014-03-17 09:22:54 +08:00
|
|
|
declare i32 @foo()
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
declare <4 x float> @do_sse(<4 x float>)
|
|
|
|
declare <8 x float> @do_avx(<8 x float>)
|
|
|
|
declare <4 x float> @llvm.x86.avx.vextractf128.ps.256(<8 x float>, i8) nounwind readnone
|
|
|
|
@x = common global <4 x float> zeroinitializer, align 16
|
|
|
|
@g = common global <8 x float> zeroinitializer, align 32
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
;; Basic checking - don't emit any vzeroupper instruction
|
2011-08-23 09:14:17 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
define <4 x float> @test00(<4 x float> %a, <4 x float> %b) nounwind {
|
|
|
|
; ALL-LABEL: test00:
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; ALL: # %bb.0:
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; ALL-NEXT: pushq %rax
|
|
|
|
; ALL-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; ALL-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; ALL-NEXT: popq %rax
|
|
|
|
; ALL-NEXT: retq
|
2011-08-23 09:14:17 +08:00
|
|
|
%add.i = fadd <4 x float> %a, %b
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
%call3 = call <4 x float> @do_sse(<4 x float> %add.i) nounwind
|
|
|
|
ret <4 x float> %call3
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
;; Check parameter 256-bit parameter passing
|
|
|
|
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
define <8 x float> @test01(<4 x float> %a, <4 x float> %b, <8 x float> %c) nounwind {
|
|
|
|
; VZ-LABEL: test01:
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ: # %bb.0:
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: subq $56, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vmovups %ymm2, (%rsp) # 32-byte Spill
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vmovaps {{.*}}(%rip), %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vzeroupper
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, {{.*}}(%rip)
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, {{.*}}(%rip)
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vmovups (%rsp), %ymm0 # 32-byte Reload
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: addq $56, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: retq
|
|
|
|
;
|
2019-11-05 02:20:00 +08:00
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-LABEL: test01:
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ: # %bb.0:
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: subq $56, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vmovups %ymm2, (%rsp) # 32-byte Spill
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vmovaps {{.*}}(%rip), %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, {{.*}}(%rip)
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, {{.*}}(%rip)
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vmovups (%rsp), %ymm0 # 32-byte Reload
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: addq $56, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: retq
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
;
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-LABEL: test01:
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2: # %bb.0:
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: subq $56, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vmovaps {{.*}}(%rip), %xmm0
|
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
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vmovups %ymm2, (%rsp) # 32-byte Spill
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vzeroupper
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, {{.*}}(%rip)
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, {{.*}}(%rip)
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vmovups (%rsp), %ymm0 # 32-byte Reload
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: addq $56, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: retq
|
|
|
|
;
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-LABEL: test01:
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2: # %bb.0:
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: subq $56, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vmovaps {{.*}}(%rip), %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vmovups %ymm2, (%rsp) # 32-byte Spill
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, {{.*}}(%rip)
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, {{.*}}(%rip)
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vmovups (%rsp), %ymm0 # 32-byte Reload
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: addq $56, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: retq
|
2019-11-05 02:20:00 +08:00
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ # %bb.0:
|
2015-02-28 05:17:42 +08:00
|
|
|
%tmp = load <4 x float>, <4 x float>* @x, align 16
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
%call = tail call <4 x float> @do_sse(<4 x float> %tmp) nounwind
|
|
|
|
store <4 x float> %call, <4 x float>* @x, align 16
|
|
|
|
%call2 = tail call <4 x float> @do_sse(<4 x float> %call) nounwind
|
|
|
|
store <4 x float> %call2, <4 x float>* @x, align 16
|
|
|
|
ret <8 x float> %c
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-17 09:22:54 +08:00
|
|
|
;; Check that vzeroupper is emitted for tail calls.
|
|
|
|
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
define <4 x float> @test02(<8 x float> %a, <8 x float> %b) nounwind {
|
|
|
|
; VZ-LABEL: test02:
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ: # %bb.0:
|
2018-10-30 22:14:34 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vzeroupper
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: jmp do_sse # TAILCALL
|
|
|
|
;
|
2019-11-05 02:20:00 +08:00
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-LABEL: test02:
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ: # %bb.0:
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: jmp do_sse # TAILCALL
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-LABEL: test02:
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2: # %bb.0:
|
2018-10-30 22:14:34 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vzeroupper
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: jmp do_sse # TAILCALL
|
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-LABEL: test02:
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2: # %bb.0:
|
2018-10-30 22:14:34 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: jmp do_sse # TAILCALL
|
2014-03-17 09:22:54 +08:00
|
|
|
%add.i = fadd <8 x float> %a, %b
|
|
|
|
%add.low = call <4 x float> @llvm.x86.avx.vextractf128.ps.256(<8 x float> %add.i, i8 0)
|
|
|
|
%call3 = tail call <4 x float> @do_sse(<4 x float> %add.low) nounwind
|
|
|
|
ret <4 x float> %call3
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
;; Test the pass convergence and also that vzeroupper is only issued when necessary,
|
|
|
|
;; for this function it should be only once
|
|
|
|
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
define <4 x float> @test03(<4 x float> %a, <4 x float> %b) nounwind {
|
|
|
|
; VZ-LABEL: test03:
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ: # %bb.0: # %entry
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: pushq %rbx
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: subq $16, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, (%rsp) # 16-byte Spill
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: .p2align 4, 0x90
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: .LBB3_1: # %while.cond
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: # =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: callq foo
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: testl %eax, %eax
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: jne .LBB3_1
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: # %bb.2: # %for.body.preheader
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: movl $4, %ebx
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vmovaps (%rsp), %xmm0 # 16-byte Reload
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: .p2align 4, 0x90
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: .LBB3_3: # %for.body
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: # =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
[x86] allow vector load narrowing with multi-use values
This is a long-awaited follow-up suggested in D33578. Since then, we've picked up even more
opportunities for vector narrowing from changes like D53784, so there are a lot of test diffs.
Apart from 2-3 strange cases, these are all wins.
I've structured this to be no-functional-change-intended for any target except for x86
because I couldn't tell if AArch64, ARM, and AMDGPU would improve or not. All of those
targets have existing regression tests (4, 4, 10 files respectively) that would be
affected. Also, Hexagon overrides the shouldReduceLoadWidth() hook, but doesn't show
any regression test diffs. The trade-off is deciding if an extra vector load is better
than a single wide load + extract_subvector.
For x86, this is almost always better (on paper at least) because we often can fold
loads into subsequent ops and not increase the official instruction count. There's also
some unknown -- but potentially large -- benefit from using narrower vector ops if wide
ops are implemented with multiple uops and/or frequency throttling is avoided.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54073
llvm-svn: 346595
2018-11-11 04:05:31 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vmovaps g+{{.*}}(%rip), %xmm0
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: decl %ebx
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: jne .LBB3_3
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: # %bb.4: # %for.end
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: addq $16, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: popq %rbx
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: retq
|
|
|
|
;
|
2019-11-05 02:20:00 +08:00
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-LABEL: test03:
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ: # %bb.0: # %entry
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: pushq %rbx
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: subq $16, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, (%rsp) # 16-byte Spill
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: .p2align 4, 0x90
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: .LBB3_1: # %while.cond
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: # =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: callq foo
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: testl %eax, %eax
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: jne .LBB3_1
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: # %bb.2: # %for.body.preheader
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: movl $4, %ebx
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vmovaps (%rsp), %xmm0 # 16-byte Reload
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: .p2align 4, 0x90
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: .LBB3_3: # %for.body
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: # =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vmovaps g+{{.*}}(%rip), %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: decl %ebx
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: jne .LBB3_3
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: # %bb.4: # %for.end
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: addq $16, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: popq %rbx
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: retq
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
;
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-LABEL: test03:
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2: # %bb.0: # %entry
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: pushq %rbx
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: subq $16, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, (%rsp) # 16-byte Spill
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: .p2align 4, 0x90
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: .LBB3_1: # %while.cond
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: # =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: callq foo
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: testl %eax, %eax
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: jne .LBB3_1
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: # %bb.2: # %for.body.preheader
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vmovaps (%rsp), %xmm0 # 16-byte Reload
|
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
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: movl $4, %ebx
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: .p2align 4, 0x90
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: .LBB3_3: # %for.body
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: # =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
[x86] allow vector load narrowing with multi-use values
This is a long-awaited follow-up suggested in D33578. Since then, we've picked up even more
opportunities for vector narrowing from changes like D53784, so there are a lot of test diffs.
Apart from 2-3 strange cases, these are all wins.
I've structured this to be no-functional-change-intended for any target except for x86
because I couldn't tell if AArch64, ARM, and AMDGPU would improve or not. All of those
targets have existing regression tests (4, 4, 10 files respectively) that would be
affected. Also, Hexagon overrides the shouldReduceLoadWidth() hook, but doesn't show
any regression test diffs. The trade-off is deciding if an extra vector load is better
than a single wide load + extract_subvector.
For x86, this is almost always better (on paper at least) because we often can fold
loads into subsequent ops and not increase the official instruction count. There's also
some unknown -- but potentially large -- benefit from using narrower vector ops if wide
ops are implemented with multiple uops and/or frequency throttling is avoided.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54073
llvm-svn: 346595
2018-11-11 04:05:31 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vmovaps g+{{.*}}(%rip), %xmm0
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
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
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: decl %ebx
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: jne .LBB3_3
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: # %bb.4: # %for.end
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: addq $16, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: popq %rbx
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: retq
|
|
|
|
;
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-LABEL: test03:
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2: # %bb.0: # %entry
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: pushq %rbx
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: subq $16, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vaddps %xmm1, %xmm0, %xmm0
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vmovaps %xmm0, (%rsp) # 16-byte Spill
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: .p2align 4, 0x90
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: .LBB3_1: # %while.cond
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: # =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: callq foo
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: testl %eax, %eax
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: jne .LBB3_1
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: # %bb.2: # %for.body.preheader
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vmovaps (%rsp), %xmm0 # 16-byte Reload
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: movl $4, %ebx
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: .p2align 4, 0x90
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: .LBB3_3: # %for.body
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: # =>This Inner Loop Header: Depth=1
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
[x86] allow vector load narrowing with multi-use values
This is a long-awaited follow-up suggested in D33578. Since then, we've picked up even more
opportunities for vector narrowing from changes like D53784, so there are a lot of test diffs.
Apart from 2-3 strange cases, these are all wins.
I've structured this to be no-functional-change-intended for any target except for x86
because I couldn't tell if AArch64, ARM, and AMDGPU would improve or not. All of those
targets have existing regression tests (4, 4, 10 files respectively) that would be
affected. Also, Hexagon overrides the shouldReduceLoadWidth() hook, but doesn't show
any regression test diffs. The trade-off is deciding if an extra vector load is better
than a single wide load + extract_subvector.
For x86, this is almost always better (on paper at least) because we often can fold
loads into subsequent ops and not increase the official instruction count. There's also
some unknown -- but potentially large -- benefit from using narrower vector ops if wide
ops are implemented with multiple uops and/or frequency throttling is avoided.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D54073
llvm-svn: 346595
2018-11-11 04:05:31 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vmovaps g+{{.*}}(%rip), %xmm0
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: callq do_sse
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: decl %ebx
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: jne .LBB3_3
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: # %bb.4: # %for.end
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: addq $16, %rsp
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: popq %rbx
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: retq
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
entry:
|
|
|
|
%add.i = fadd <4 x float> %a, %b
|
2014-03-17 09:22:54 +08:00
|
|
|
br label %while.cond
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
while.cond:
|
2014-03-17 09:22:54 +08:00
|
|
|
%call = tail call i32 @foo()
|
|
|
|
%tobool = icmp eq i32 %call, 0
|
|
|
|
br i1 %tobool, label %for.body, label %while.cond
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
for.body:
|
|
|
|
%i.018 = phi i32 [ 0, %while.cond ], [ %1, %for.body ]
|
|
|
|
%c.017 = phi <4 x float> [ %add.i, %while.cond ], [ %call14, %for.body ]
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
%call5 = tail call <4 x float> @do_sse(<4 x float> %c.017) nounwind
|
|
|
|
%call7 = tail call <4 x float> @do_sse(<4 x float> %call5) nounwind
|
2015-02-28 05:17:42 +08:00
|
|
|
%tmp11 = load <8 x float>, <8 x float>* @g, align 32
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
%0 = tail call <4 x float> @llvm.x86.avx.vextractf128.ps.256(<8 x float> %tmp11, i8 1) nounwind
|
|
|
|
%call14 = tail call <4 x float> @do_sse(<4 x float> %0) nounwind
|
|
|
|
%1 = add nsw i32 %i.018, 1
|
|
|
|
%exitcond = icmp eq i32 %1, 4
|
|
|
|
br i1 %exitcond, label %for.end, label %for.body
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-17 09:22:54 +08:00
|
|
|
for.end:
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
ret <4 x float> %call14
|
2011-08-23 09:14:17 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
;; Check that we also perform vzeroupper when we return from a function.
|
|
|
|
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
define <4 x float> @test04(<4 x float> %a, <4 x float> %b) nounwind {
|
|
|
|
; VZ-LABEL: test04:
|
2017-12-05 01:18:51 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ: # %bb.0:
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: pushq %rax
|
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: # kill: def $xmm0 killed $xmm0 def $ymm0
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vinsertf128 $1, %xmm1, %ymm0, %ymm0
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: callq do_avx
|
2018-02-01 06:04:26 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: # kill: def $xmm0 killed $xmm0 killed $ymm0
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: popq %rax
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: vzeroupper
|
|
|
|
; VZ-NEXT: retq
|
|
|
|
;
|
2019-11-05 02:20:00 +08:00
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-LABEL: test04:
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ: # %bb.0:
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: pushq %rax
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: # kill: def $xmm0 killed $xmm0 def $ymm0
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: vinsertf128 $1, %xmm1, %ymm0, %ymm0
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: callq do_avx
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: # kill: def $xmm0 killed $xmm0 killed $ymm0
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: popq %rax
|
|
|
|
; DISABLE-VZ-NEXT: retq
|
2018-10-28 04:36:11 +08:00
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-LABEL: test04:
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2: # %bb.0:
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: pushq %rax
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: # kill: def $xmm0 killed $xmm0 def $ymm0
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vinsertf128 $1, %xmm1, %ymm0, %ymm0
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: callq do_avx
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: # kill: def $xmm0 killed $xmm0 killed $ymm0
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: popq %rax
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: vzeroupper
|
|
|
|
; BDVER2-NEXT: retq
|
|
|
|
;
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-LABEL: test04:
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2: # %bb.0:
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: pushq %rax
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: # kill: def $xmm0 killed $xmm0 def $ymm0
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: vinsertf128 $1, %xmm1, %ymm0, %ymm0
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: callq do_avx
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: # kill: def $xmm0 killed $xmm0 killed $ymm0
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: popq %rax
|
|
|
|
; BTVER2-NEXT: retq
|
2011-11-05 07:46:11 +08:00
|
|
|
%shuf = shufflevector <4 x float> %a, <4 x float> %b, <8 x i32> <i32 0, i32 1, i32 2, i32 3, i32 4, i32 5, i32 6, i32 7>
|
|
|
|
%call = call <8 x float> @do_avx(<8 x float> %shuf) nounwind
|
|
|
|
%shuf2 = shufflevector <8 x float> %call, <8 x float> undef, <4 x i32> <i32 0, i32 1, i32 2, i32 3>
|
|
|
|
ret <4 x float> %shuf2
|
|
|
|
}
|
2017-05-28 21:57:59 +08:00
|
|
|
|