While this one is trivial and identical to the previous patch,
there is a weird cost change in a follow-up patch that i'm not sure about.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113851
While this one is trivial and identical to the previous patch,
there is a weird cost change in a follow-up patch that i'm not sure about.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113850
The basic idea is simple, if we don't have native shuffle for this element type,
then we must have native shuffle for wider element type,
so promote, replicate, demote.
I believe, asking `getCastInstrCost(Instruction::Trunc` is correct semantically,
case in point `trunc <32 x i32> to <32 x i8>` aka 2 * ZMM will naively result in
2 * XMM, that then will be packed into 1 * YMM,
and it should count the cost of said packing,
not just the truncations.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113609
This was noticed in D113609, hopefully it unblocks that patch.
There are likely other similar problems.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113842
VBMI introduced VPERMB, so cost-model i8 replication shuffle using it.
Note that we can still model i8 replication shufflle without VBMI,
by promoting to i16/i32. That will be done in follow-ups.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113479
BWI introduced VPERMW, so cost-model i16 replication shuffle using it.
Note that we can still model i16 replication shufflle without BWI,
by promoting to i32. That will be done in follow-ups.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113478
This models lowering to `vpermd`/`vpermq`/`vpermps`/`vpermpd`,
that take a single input vector and a single index vector,
and are cross-lane. So far i haven't seen evidence that
replication ever results in demanding more than a single
input vector per output vector.
This results in *shockingly* lesser costs :)
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113350
When accumulating the GEP offset in BasicAA, we should use the
pointer index size rather than the pointer size.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112370
This finally creates proper test coverage for replication shuffles,
that are used by LV for conditional loads, and will allow to add
proper costmodel at least for AVX512.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D113324
The basic idea here is that given a zero extended narrow IV, we can prove the inner IV to be NUW if we can prove there's a value the inner IV must take before overflow which must exit the loop.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109457
Even though AVX512's masked mem ops (unlike AVX1/2) have a mask
that is a `VF x i1`, replication of said masks happens after
promotion of it to `VF x i8`, so we should use `i8`, not `i1`,
when calculating the cost of mask replication.
I don't really buy that masked interleaved memory loads/stores are supported on X86.
There is zero costmodel test coverage, no actual cost modelling for the generation
of the mask repetition, and basically only two LV tests.
Additionally, i'm not very interested in AVX512.
I don't know if this really helps "soft" block over at
https://reviews.llvm.org/D111460#inline-1075467,
but i think it can't make things worse at least.
When we are being told that there is a masking, instead of
completely giving up and falling back to
fully scalarizing `BasicTTIImplBase::getInterleavedMemoryOpCost()`,
let's correctly query the cost of masked memory ops,
keep all the pretty shuffle cost modelling,
but scalarize the cost computation for the mask replication.
I think, not scalarizing the shuffles themselves
may adjust the computed costs a bit,
and maybe hopefully just enough to hide the "regressions"
at https://reviews.llvm.org/D111460#inline-1075467
I do mean hide, because the test coverage is non-existent.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112873
As it can be seen in `InnerLoopVectorizer::vectorizeInterleaveGroup()`,
in some cases (reported by `UseMaskForGaps`), the gaps in the interleaved load/store group
will be masked away by another constant mask, so there is no need to
account for the cost of replication of the mask for these.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112877
Copied from llvm/test/Transforms/LoopVectorize/X86/x86-interleaved-accesses-masked-group.ll
As discussed in D111460 / D112877 / D112873 we have basically no test coverage
for this part of cost model.
If we know that the var * scale multiplication is nsw, we can use
a saturating multiplication on the range (as a good approximation
of an nsw multiply). This recovers some cases where the fix from
D112611 is unnecessarily strict. (This can be further strengthened
by using a saturating add, but we currently don't track all the
necessary information for that.)
This exposes an issue in our NSW tracking for multiplies. The code
was assuming that (X +nsw Y) *nsw Z results in
(X *nsw Z) +nsw (Y *nsw Z) -- however, it is possible that the
distributed multiplications overflow, even if the non-distributed
one does not. We should discard the nsw flag if the the offset is
non-zero. If we just have (X *nsw Y) *nsw Z then concluding
X *nsw (Y *nsw Z) is fine.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112848
blockaddresses do not participate in the call graph since the only
instructions that use them must all return to someplace within the
current function. And passes cannot retrieve a function address from a
blockaddress.
This was suggested by efriedma in D58260.
Fixes PR50881.
Reviewed By: nickdesaulniers
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112178
The scale multiplication is only guaranteed to be nsw if the GEP
is inbounds (or the multiplication is trivial). Previously we were
only considering explicit muls in GEP indices.
BasicAA currently tries to determine that the offset is positive by
checking whether all variable indices are positive based on known
bits, multiplied by a positive scale. However, this is incorrect
if the scale multiplication might overflow. In the modified test
case the original value is positive, but may be negative after a
left shift.
Fix this by converting known bits into a constant range and reusing
the range-based logic, which handles overflow correctly.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112611
Make the range check more precise by calculating the range of
potentially accessed bytes for both accesses and checking whether
their intersection is empty. In that case there can be no overlap
between the accesses and the result is NoAlias.
This is more powerful than the previous approach, because it can
deal with sign-wrapped ranges. In the test case the original range
is [-1, INT_MAX] but becomes [0, INT_MIN] after applying the offset.
This is a wrapping range, so getSignedMin/getSignedMax will treat
it as a full range. However, the range excludes the elements
[INT_MIN+1, -1], which is enough to prove NoAlias with an access
at offset -1.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112486
D109746 made BasicAA use range information to determine the
minimum/maximum GEP offset. However, it was limited to the case of
a single variable index. This patch extends support to multiple
indices by adding all the ranges together.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112378
GEP indices larger than the GEP index size are implicitly truncated
to the index size. BasicAA currently doesn't model this, resulting
in incorrect alias analysis results.
Fix this by explicitly modelling truncation in CastedValue in the
same way we do zext and sext. Additionally we need to disable a
number of optimizations for truncated values, in particular
"non-zero" and "non-equal" may no longer hold after truncation.
I believe the constant offset heuristic is also not necessarily
correct for truncated values, but wasn't able to come up with a
test for that one.
A possible followup here would be to use the new mechanism to
model explicit trunc as well (which should be much more common,
as it is the canonical form). This is straightforward, but omitted
here to separate the correctness fix from the analysis improvement.
(Side note: While I say "index size" above, BasicAA currently uses
the pointer size instead. Something for another day...)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110977
By definition, interleaving load of stride N means:
load N*VF elements, and shuffle them into N VF-sized vectors,
with 0'th vector containing elements `[0, VF)*stride + 0`,
and 1'th vector containing elements `[0, VF)*stride + 1`.
Example: https://godbolt.org/z/df561Me5E (i64 stride 4 vf 2 => cost 6)
Now, not fully interleaved load, is when not all of these vectors is demanded.
So at worst, we could just pretend that everything is demanded,
and discard the non-demanded vectors. What this means is that the cost
for not-fully-interleaved group should be not greater than the cost
for the same fully-interleaved group, but perhaps somewhat less.
Examples:
https://godbolt.org/z/a78dK5Geq (i64 stride 4 (indices 012u) vf 2 => cost 4)
https://godbolt.org/z/G91ceo8dM (i64 stride 4 (indices 01uu) vf 2 => cost 2)
https://godbolt.org/z/5joYob9rx (i64 stride 4 (indices 0uuu) vf 2 => cost 1)
Right now, for such not-fully-interleaved loads we just use the costs
for fully-interleaved loads. But at least **in general**,
that is obviously overly pessimistic, because **in general**,
not all the shuffles needed to perform the full interleaving
will end up being live.
So what this does, is naively scales the interleaving cost
by the fraction of the live members. I believe this should still result
in the right ballpark cost estimate, although it may be over/under -estimate.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112307
This patch introduces a new function:
AArch64Subtarget::getVScaleForTuning
that returns a value for vscale that can be used for tuning the cost
model when using scalable vectors. The VScaleForTuning option in
AArch64Subtarget is initialised according to the following rules:
1. If the user has specified the CPU to tune for we use that, else
2. If the target CPU was specified we use that, else
3. The tuning is set to "generic".
For CPUs of type "generic" I have assumed that vscale=2.
New tests added here:
Analysis/CostModel/AArch64/sve-gather.ll
Analysis/CostModel/AArch64/sve-scatter.ll
Transforms/LoopVectorize/AArch64/sve-strict-fadd-cost.ll
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110259
As seen in PR51869 the ScalarEvolution::isImpliedCond function might
end up spending lots of time when doing the isKnownPredicate checks.
Calling isKnownPredicate for example result in isKnownViaInduction
being called, which might result in isLoopBackedgeGuardedByCond being
called, and then we might get one or more new calls to isImpliedCond.
Even if the scenario described here isn't an infinite loop, using
some random generated C programs as input indicates that those
isKnownPredicate checks quite often returns true. On the other hand,
the third condition that needs to be fulfilled in order to "prove
implications via truncation", i.e. the isImpliedCondBalancedTypes
check, is rarely fulfilled.
I also made some similar experiments to look at how often we would
get the same result when using isKnownViaNonRecursiveReasoning instead
of isKnownPredicate. So far I haven't seen a single case when codegen
is negatively impacted by using isKnownViaNonRecursiveReasoning. On
the other hand, it seems like we get rid of the compile time explosion
seen in PR51869 that way. Hence this patch.
Reviewed By: nikic
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D112080
A few more tuples are being queried after D111546. Might be good to model them,
They all require a lot of manual assembly surgery.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/9bnKrefcG - for intels `Block RThroughput: =40.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =16.0`
So could pick cost of `40`
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/5s3s14dEY - for intels `Block RThroughput: =40.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =16.0`
So we could pick cost of `40`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111945
A few more tuples are being queried after D111546. Might be good to model them,
They all require a lot of manual assembly surgery.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/MTaKboejM - for intels `Block RThroughput: =32.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=16.0`
So could pick cost of `32`
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/v7xPj3Wd4 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =32.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=32.0`
So we could pick cost of `32`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111944
A few more tuples are being queried after D111546. Might be good to model them,
They all require a lot of manual assembly surgery.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/11rcvdreP - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=68.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=48.0`
So could pick cost of `68`
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/6aM11fWcP - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=64.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=32.0`
So we could pick cost of `64`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111943
A few more tuples are being queried after D111546. Might be good to model them,
They all require a lot of manual assembly surgery.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/s5b6E6jsP - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=32.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=24.0`
So could pick cost of `32`
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/efh99d93b - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=48.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=32.0`
So we could pick cost of `48`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111942
A few more tuples are being queried after D111546. Might be good to model them,
They all require a lot of manual assembly surgery.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/YTeT9M7fW - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=212.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=64.0`
So could pick cost of `212`
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/vc954KEGP - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=90.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=24.0`
So we could pick cost of `90`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111940
These cases use the same codegen as AVX2 (pshuflw/pshufd) for the sub-128bit vector deinterleaving, and unpcklqdq for v2i64.
It's going to take a while to add full interleaved cost coverage, but since these are the same for SSE2 -> AVX2 it should be an easy win.
Fixes PR47437
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111938
And another attempt to start untangling this ball of threads around gather.
There's `TTI::prefersVectorizedAddressing()`hoop, which confusingly defaults to `true`,
which tells LV to try to vectorize the addresses that lead to loads,
but X86 generally can not deal with vectors of addresses,
the only instructions that support that are GATHER/SCATTER,
but even those aren't available until AVX2, and aren't really usable until AVX512.
This specializes the hook for X86, to return true only if we have AVX512 or AVX2 w/ fast gather.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111546
While i've modelled most of the relevant tuples for AVX2,
that only covered fully-interleaved groups.
By definition, interleaving load of stride N means:
load N*VF elements, and shuffle them into N VF-sized vectors,
with 0'th vector containing elements `[0, VF)*stride + 0`,
and 1'th vector containing elements `[0, VF)*stride + 1`.
Example: https://godbolt.org/z/df561Me5E (i64 stride 4 vf 2 => cost 6)
Now, not fully interleaved load, is when not all of these vectors is demanded.
So at worst, we could just pretend that everything is demanded,
and discard the non-demanded vectors. What this means is that the cost
for not-fully-interleaved group should be not greater than the cost
for the same fully-interleaved group, but perhaps somewhat less.
Examples:
https://godbolt.org/z/a78dK5Geq (i64 stride 4 (indices 012u) vf 2 => cost 4)
https://godbolt.org/z/G91ceo8dM (i64 stride 4 (indices 01uu) vf 2 => cost 2)
https://godbolt.org/z/5joYob9rx (i64 stride 4 (indices 0uuu) vf 2 => cost 1)
As we have established over the course of last ~70 patches, (wow)
`BaseT::getInterleavedMemoryOpCos()` is absolutely bogus,
it is usually almost an order of magnitude overestimation,
so i would claim that we should at least use the hardcoded costs
of fully interleaved load groups.
We could go further and adjust them e.g. by the number of demanded indices,
but then i'm somewhat fearful of underestimating the cost.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111174
Currently, DecomposeGEP() bails out on the whole decomposition if
it encounters a scalable GEP type anywhere. However, it is fine to
still analyze other GEPs that we look through before hitting the
scalable GEP. This does mean that the decomposed GEP base is no
longer required to be the same as the underlying object. However,
I don't believe this property is necessary for correctness anymore.
This allows us to compute slightly more precise aliasing results
for GEP chains containing scalable vectors, though my primary
interest here is simplifying the code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110511
Without SSE41 sext/zext instructions the extensions will be split, meaning that the MUL->PMADDWD fold will split the sext_i32(x) into zext_i32(sext_i16(x))
`X86TTIImpl::getGSScalarCost()` has (at least) two issues:
* it naively computes the cost of sequence of `insertelement`/`extractelement`.
If we are operating not on the XMM (but YMM/ZMM),
this widely overestimates the cost of subvector insertions/extractions.
* Gather/scatter takes a vector of pointers, and scalarization results in us performing
scalar memory operation for each of these pointers, but we never account for the cost
of extracting these pointers out of the vector of pointers.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111222
The CFG being changed and the overall call graph are not related, we can introduce/remove calls without changing the CFG.
Resolves one of the issues in PR51946.
Reviewed By: asbirlea
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111275
We would like to start pushing -mcpu=generic towards enabling the set of
features that improves performance for some CPUs, without hurting any
others. A blend of the performance options hopefully beneficial to all
CPUs. The largest part of that is enabling in-order scheduling using the
Cortex-A55 schedule model. This is similar to the Arm backend change
from eecb353d0e which made -mcpu=generic perform in-order scheduling
using the cortex-a8 schedule model.
The idea is that in-order cpu's require the most help in instruction
scheduling, whereas out-of-order cpus can for the most part out-of-order
schedule around different codegen. Our benchmarking suggests that
hypothesis holds. When running on an in-order core this improved
performance by 3.8% geomean on a set of DSP workloads, 2% geomean on
some other embedded benchmark and between 1% and 1.8% on a set of
singlecore and multicore workloads, all running on a Cortex-A55 cluster.
On an out-of-order cpu the results are a lot more noisy but show flat
performance or an improvement. On the set of DSP and embedded
benchmarks, run on a Cortex-A78 there was a very noisy 1% speed
improvement. Using the most detailed results I could find, SPEC2006 runs
on a Neoverse N1 show a small increase in instruction count (+0.127%),
but a decrease in cycle counts (-0.155%, on average). The instruction
count is very low noise, the cycle count is more noisy with a 0.15%
decrease not being significant. SPEC2k17 shows a small decrease (-0.2%)
in instruction count leading to a -0.296% decrease in cycle count. These
results are within noise margins but tend to show a small improvement in
general.
When specifying an Apple target, clang will set "-target-cpu apple-a7"
on the command line, so should not be affected by this change when
running from clang. This also doesn't enable more runtime unrolling like
-mcpu=cortex-a55 does, only changing the schedule used.
A lot of existing tests have updated. This is a summary of the important
differences:
- Most changes are the same instructions in a different order.
- Sometimes this leads to very minor inefficiencies, such as requiring
an extra mov to move variables into r0/v0 for the return value of a test
function.
- misched-fusion.ll was no longer fusing the pairs of instructions it
should, as per D110561. I've changed the schedule used in the test
for now.
- neon-mla-mls.ll now uses "mul; sub" as opposed to "neg; mla" due to
the different latencies. This seems fine to me.
- Some SVE tests do not always remove movprfx where they did before due
to different register allocation giving different destructive forms.
- The tests argument-blocks-array-of-struct.ll and arm64-windows-calls.ll
produce two LDR where they previously produced an LDP due to
store-pair-suppress kicking in.
- arm64-ldp.ll and arm64-neon-copy.ll are missing pre/postinc on LPD.
- Some tests such as arm64-neon-mul-div.ll and
ragreedy-local-interval-cost.ll have more, less or just different
spilling.
- In aarch64_generated_funcs.ll.generated.expected one part of the
function is no longer outlined. Interestingly if I switch this to use
any other scheduled even less is outlined.
Some of these are expected to happen, such as differences in outlining
or register spilling. There will be places where these result in worse
codegen, places where they are better, with the SPEC instruction counts
suggesting it is not a decrease overall, on average.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110830
Split off ABS cost handling from MIN/MAX and use explicit predicates for each
Our generic expansion of ABS doesn't use NEG+CMP+SELECT any more (its now ASHR+ADD+XOR) so this needs to be updated.
When checking to see if we can apply IR flags to a SCEV, we need to identify a bound on the defining scope of the SCEV to be produced. We'd previously added support for a couple SCEVExpr types which trivially imply bounds, but hadn't handled types such as umax where the bounds come from the bounds of the operands. This does the obvious thing, and recurses through operands searching for a tighter bound on the defining scope.
I'm honestly surprised by how little this seems to mater on existing tests, but it's worth doing for completeness sake alone.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111191
This does for readability of returns within said function as what we do for the caller side when reasoning about what might be poison.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111180
This patch removes a compile time restriction from isSCEVExprNeverPoison. We've strengthened our ability to reason about flags on scopes other than addrecs, and this bailout prevents us from using it. The comment is also suspect as well in that we're in the middle of constructing a SCEV for I. As such, we're going to visit all operands *anyways*.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111186
Fix copy+pasta that was checking for smul_fix instead of smul_with_overflow to detected signed values.
The LShr is performed on the extended type as we use it to truncate+extract the upper/hi bits of the extended multiply.
More closely matches the default expansion from TargetLowering::expandMULO
BasicAA GEP decomposition currently performs all calculation on the
maximum pointer size, but at least 64-bit, with an option to double
the size. The code comment claims that this improves analysis power
when working with uint64_t indices on 32-bit systems. However, I don't
see how this can be, at least while maintaining correctness:
When working on canonical code, the GEP indices will have GEP index
size. If the original code worked on uint64_t with a 32-bit size_t,
then there will be truncs inserted before use as a GEP index. Linear
expression decomposition does not look through truncs, so this will
be an opaque value as far as GEP decomposition is concerned. Working
on a wider pointer size does not help here (or have any effect at all).
When working on non-canonical code (before first InstCombine), the
GEP indices are implicitly truncated to GEP index size. The BasicAA
code currently just ignores this fact completely, and pretends that
this truncation doesn't happen. This is incorrect and will be
addressed by D110977.
I believe that for correctness reasons, it is important to work on
the actual GEP index size to properly model potential overflow.
BasicAA tries to patch over the fact that it uses the wrong size
(see adjustToPointerSize), but it only does that in limited cases
(only for constant values, and not all of them either). I'd like to
move this code towards always working on the correct size, and
dropping these artificial pointer size adjustments is the first step
towards that.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110657
As suggested on D111024, we should treat getCmpSelInstrCost calls without a specific predicate as matching the worst case predicate cost.
These regressions will be addressed with a mixture of D111024 and fixing other specific getCmpSelInstrCost calls to have realistic predicates.
These are meant to check a future patch which recurses through operands of SCEVs, but because all SCEVs are trivially bounded by function entry, we need to arrange the trivial scope not to be valid. (i.e. we specifically need a lower defining scope)
The coverage could have cumulative explosion here,
so i'm adding only the most basic cases,
and hoping it's enough, though more can be added if needed.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1jfGddcre - for intels `Block RThroughput: =36.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =12.0`
So could pick cost of `36`
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/ao9srMT8r - for intels `Block RThroughput: =30.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =12.0`
So we could pick cost of `30`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111094
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/rc8jYxW6M - for intels `Block RThroughput: =18.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =6.0`
So could pick cost of `18`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/9PhPEr65G - for intels `Block RThroughput: =15.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =6.0`
So we could pick cost of `15`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111093
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/onese7rec - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =3.0`
So could pick cost of `6`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/bMd7dddnT - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=6.0`
So we could pick cost of `8`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111092
This one required quite a bit of an assembly surgery, but i think it's in the right ballpark..
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/na97Kb96o - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=64.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=32.0`
So could pick cost of `64`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/GG1WeoKar - for intels `Block RThroughput: =66.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=27.5`
So we could pick cost of `66`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111091
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/jK85GWKaK - for intels `Block RThroughput: =31.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=17.0`
So could pick cost of `31`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/hPWWhEEf9 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =33.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=13.8`
So we could pick cost of `33`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111089
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/szEj1ceee - for intels `Block RThroughput: =15.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.8`
So could pick cost of `15`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/81bq4fTo1 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =12.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=10.0`
So we could pick cost of `12`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111087
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/aec96Thee - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.3`
So could pick cost of `6`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/aec96Thee - for intels `Block RThroughput: =9.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So we could pick cost of `9`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111083
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/3M3hbq7n8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =20.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =8.0`
So could pick cost of `20`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/zvnPYWTx7 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =20.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =8.0`
So we could pick cost of `20`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111076
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/MTKdzjvnr - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So could pick cost of `8`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/cMYEvqoah - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So we could pick cost of `8`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111075
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/z197317d1 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =2.0`
So could pick cost of `6`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/8dzszjf9q - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So we could pick cost of `6`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111073
This one required quite a bit of assembly surgery, but the trend continues, so i think this is right.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/EKWdj8cKT - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=32.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=24.0`
So could pick cost of `32`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/zj4bb9P75 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =32.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=16.0`
So we could pick cost of `32`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111064
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/a6rxMG6ec - for intels `Block RThroughput: =16.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=12.0`
So could pick cost of `16`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/ced1bdqc9 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =16.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.0`
So we could pick cost of `16`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111063
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/avq1oz98W - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =4.0`
So could pick cost of `8`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/89PGMc1qs - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=6.0`
So we could pick cost of `6`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111061
Finally, we are getting to the heavy-hitter stuff!
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/7crGWoar6 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So could pick cost of `4`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/T8aq3MszM - for intels `Block RThroughput: =5.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So we could pick cost of `5`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111060
When determining NoAlias based on object size and dereferenceability
information, we can ignore frees for the same reason we can ignore
possible null pointers (if null is not a valid pointer): Actually
accessing the null pointer / freed pointer would be immediate UB,
and AA results are only valid under the assumption of an access.
This addresses a minor regression from D110745.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111028
This required huge amount of assembly surgery, but i think this is about right.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/z11crMEcj - for intels `Block RThroughput: =20.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=18.0`
So could pick cost of `25`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/eqT4ze3j4 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =24.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=16.0`
So we could pick cost of `24`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111031
This one required quite a bit of assembly surgery.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/oYWv4cTnK - for intels `Block RThroughput: =10.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.0`
So pick cost of `10`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/33GMhrsG9 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =12.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.0`
So pick cost of `12`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111027
This one required quite a bit of assembly surgery.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Tce3osvcz - for intels `Block RThroughput: =5.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So pick cost of `5`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/oc3arEcnE - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So pick cost of `6`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111026
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/sz5qdKnr4 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =1.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.0`
So pick cost of `1`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Kzdjff63v - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111025
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/5fqrh4qqo - for intels `Block RThroughput: =14.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=12.0`
So pick cost of `14`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/5fqrh4qqo - for intels `Block RThroughput: =22.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=16.0`
So pick cost of `22`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111022
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/zdz5Ga6fs - for intels `Block RThroughput: =7.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=6.0`
So pick cost of `7`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/qn71513ac - for intels `Block RThroughput: =11.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.0`
So pick cost of `11`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111021
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/d8PdhEszo - for intels `Block RThroughput: =3.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `3`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/WojonfG5n - for intels `Block RThroughput: =5.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `5`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111020
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/z8qa14bs3 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =3.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =1.5`
So pick cost of `3`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/GYGajoc4K - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111019
This addresses a comment from review on D109845. Even for SCEVs which we can't find true bounds without recursing through operands, entry to the function forms a trivial upper bound. In some cases, this trivial bound is enough to prove safety of flag inference.
This is a followon to D109845. With that landed, we will have fixed all known instances of pr51817, and can thus start inferring flags more aggressively with greatly reduced risk of miscompiles. This patch simply applies the same inference logic used in that patch to our other major flag inference path.
We can still do much better here (on both paths), but this is our first step.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111003
This fixes a violation of the wrap flag rules introduced in c4048d8f. This is an alternate fix to D106852.
The basic problem being fixed is that we infer a set of flags which is valid at some inner scope S1 (usually by correctly propagating them from IR), and then (incorrectly) extend them to a SCEV in scope S2 where S1 != S2. This is not in general safe per the wrap flags semantics recently defined.
In this patch, I include a simple inference step to handle the case where we can prove that S2 is the preheader of the loop S1, and that entry into S2 implies execution of S1. See the code for a more detailed explanation.
One worry I have with this patch is that I might be over-fitting what shows up in tests - and thus hiding negative impact we'd see in the real world. My best defense is that the rule used here very closely follows the one used to propagate the flags from IR to the inner add to start with, and thus if one is reasonable, so probably is the other. Curious what others think about that piece.
The test diffs are roughly as expected. Mostly analysis only, with two transform changes. Oddly, the result looks better in the loop-idiom test, and I don't understand the PPC output enough to have tell. Nothing terrible looking though. (For context, without the scope inference peephole, the test delta includes a couple of vectorization tests. Again, not super concerning, but slightly more so.)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109845
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/rMaYr67hz - for intels `Block RThroughput: =56.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=17.8`
So pick cost of `56`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/eMsbKqnvv - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=54.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=15.0`
So pick cost of `54`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111018
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1T6MMzeh3 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =28.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.5`
So pick cost of `28`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1T6MMzeh3 - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=27.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=7.0`
So pick cost of `27`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111017
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Mh9MnnT8W - for intels `Block RThroughput: =9.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.3`
So pick cost of `9`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Mh9MnnT8W - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=12.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.3`
So pick cost of `12`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111016
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/sP4j1173f - for intels `Block RThroughput: =7.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `7`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/sP4j1173f - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `6`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111015
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/xnE988aej - for intels `Block RThroughput: =5.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.5`
So pick cost of `5`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/rMGT31Tnh - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111014
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/c1jjKqP7b - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=82.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=26.0`
So pick cost of `82`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/YM4ErY8x7 - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=90.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=25.5`
So pick cost of `90`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111013
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Gz8hhqfTM - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=43.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=14.0`
So pick cost of `43`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/9vrdssYa8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=27.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=12.0`
So pick cost of `27`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111012
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/v98qPTTf6 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =18.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =6.0`
So pick cost of `18`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/rn5T9E8q6 - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=16.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.5`
So pick cost of `16`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111011
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/4sWhs396o - for intels `Block RThroughput: =14.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=7.0`
So pick cost of `14`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/4sWhs396o - for intels `Block RThroughput: =9.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `9`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111010
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/jvj6jzns5 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `6`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/ros7eebMP - for intels `Block RThroughput: =7.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `7`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D111008
While we already model this tuple, the load cost is divergent from reality, so fix it.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/zWMhhnPYa - for intels `Block RThroughput: =56.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=24.0`
So pick cost of `56`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/vnqqjWx51 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =12.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So pick cost of `12`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110971
While we already model this tuple, the values are divergent from reality, so fix them.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/TrGW7cKsE - for intels `Block RThroughput: =24.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=12.0`
So pick cost of `24`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Mh7qaqEfe - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So pick cost of `8`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110970
While we already model this tuple, the values are divergent from reality, so fix them.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/v7746Wcf7 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =12.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=6.0`
So pick cost of `12`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/aEeEohEbP - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110969
While we already model this tuple, the store cost is divergent from reality, so fix it.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1n4bPh7Tn - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/r8K9sveqo - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110968
While we already model this tuple, the values are divergent from reality, so fix them.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/KP6nn36zs - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/ov95zhrq6 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110966
For VF=16, costs are correct.
For VF=32, load cost is divergent.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/qKjevqf4W - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=14.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.5`
So pick cost of `14`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/xTssTq319 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =13.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=5.5`
So pick cost of `13`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110961
While we already model this tuple, the values are divergent from reality, so fix them.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1jeocxj55 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `6`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/fr7xfa3K5 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `6`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110960
While we already model this tuple, the values are divergent from reality, so fix them.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/obWz3PrfK - for intels `Block RThroughput: =3.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.5`
So pick cost of `3`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/orjPshn3h - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110958
While we already model this tuple, the values are divergent from reality, so fix them.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/WYscYMcW4 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =3.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.5`
So pick cost of `3`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/e9qvYdbbs - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110956
This fixes a violation of the wrap flag rules introduced in c4048d8f. This was also noted in the (very old) PR23527.
The issue being fixed is that we assume the inbound flag on any GEP assumes that all users of *any* gep (or add) which happens to map to that SCEV would also be UB if the (other) gep overflowed. That's simply not true.
In terms of the test diffs, I don't see anything seriously problematic. The lost flags are expected (given the semantic restriction on when its legal to tag the SCEV), and there are several cases where the previously inferred flags are unsound per the new semantics.
The only common trend I noticed when looking at the deltas is that by not considering branch on poison as immediate UB in ValueTracking, we do miss a few cases we could reclaim. We may be able to claw some of these back with the follow ideas mentioned in PR51817.
It's worth noting that most of the changes are analysis result only changes. The two transform changes are pretty minimal. In one case, we miss the opportunity to infer a nuw (correctly). In the other, we fail to fold an exit and produce a loop invariant form instead. This one is probably over-reduced as the program appears to be undefined in practice, and neither before or after exploits that.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109789
This code is attempting to prove that I must execute if we enter the defining scope of the SCEV which will be created from I. In the case where it found a defining addrec scope, it had a rather odd restriction that all of the other operands must be loop invariant in that addrec's loop.
As near as I can tell here, we really only need a upper bound on the defining scope. If we can prove the stronger property, then we must also have proven the property on the exact defining scope as well.
In practice, the actual effect of this change is narrow. The compile time restriction at the top of the routine basically limits us to I being an arithmetic in some loop L with both an addrec operand in L, and a unknown operands in L. Possible to demonstrate, but the main value of the change is removing unneeded code.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110892
When taking into account the fact that GEP indices are truncated
to 32-bits in this test, the "path dependence" goes away, so
inferring MustAlias for all pointers would be correct. As this
goes against the spirit of the test, change it to extend from
i16 instead.
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1WMTojvfW - for intels `Block RThroughput: =16.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.0`
So pick cost of `16`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1WMTojvfW - for intels `Block RThroughput: =16.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=16.0`
So pick cost of `16`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110840
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/PGYbYKPq8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So pick cost of `8`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/PGYbYKPq8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.0`
So pick cost of `8`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110838
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/j5co1qWEW - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/j5co1qWEW - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110837
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/8a1cfGeMn - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/jMdcM47bx - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110835
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
Here for `store` pattern we are starting to have spilling,
so accurate modelling may be problematic,
although if i drop the spilling, the measurements don't change.
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1oTTnncbx - for intels `Block RThroughput: =16.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=8.0`
So pick cost of `16`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1oTTnncbx - for intels `Block RThroughput: =16.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =8.0`
So pick cost of `16`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110761
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/M9eev3xe8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So pick cost of `8`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/M9eev3xe8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =4.0`
So pick cost of `8`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110756
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/n8aMKeo4E - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/n8aMKeo4E - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110755
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/EM5Ean7bd - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/EM5Ean7bd - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110754
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/4rY96hnGT - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/vbo37Y3r9 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =1.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =0.5`
So pick cost of `1`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110753
This patch additional tests with i64 GEP indices for 32 bit pointers.
@mustalias_overflow_in_32_bit_add_mul_gep highlights a case where
BasicAA currently incorrectly determines noalias.
Modeled in Alive2 for 32 bit pointers: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/HHjQgb
Modeled in Alive2 for 64 bit pointers: https://alive2.llvm.org/ce/z/DoWK2c
The expansion for these was updated in https://reviews.llvm.org/D47927 but the cost model was not adjusted.
I believe the cost model was also incorrect for the old expansion.
The expansion prior to D47927 used 3 icmps using LHS, RHS, and Result
to calculate theirs signs. Then 2 icmps to compare the signs. Followed
by an And. The previous cost model was using 3 icmps and 2 selects.
Digging back through git blame, those 2 selects in the cost model used to
be 2 icmps, but were changed in https://reviews.llvm.org/D90681
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110739
The information can be implicit (from `ValueTracking`) or explicit.
This implements the backend part of the following RFC
https://groups.google.com/g/llvm-dev/c/T9o51zB1JY.
We still need to settle on how to best represent the information in the
IR, but this is a separate discussion.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D109746
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/xz6x7c35P - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.5`
So pick cost of `6`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/xz6x7c35P - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110709
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/a9hv4z47v - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/6GfPn1b79 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =3.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `3`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110708
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
Identical to VF=2.
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/4TEbdzbMM - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/MYfzGPf3Y - for intels `Block RThroughput: =1.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=0.5`
So pick cost of `1`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110705
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
Identical to VF=2.
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/sGE41GYo7 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/ba5r3s9xa - for intels `Block RThroughput: =1.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=0.5`
So pick cost of `1`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110704
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/caKqjr9hb - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/6TTn3eKj8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =1.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=0.5`
So pick cost of `1`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110702
getScalarizationOverhead() results in a somewhat better cost estimation than counting the insertion/extraction costs directly. Notably, this is still overestimating the costs.
Original Patch by: @lebedev.ri (Roman Lebedev)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110713
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For this tuple, measuring becomes problematic since there's a lot of spilling going on,
but apparently all these memory ops do not affect worst-case estimate at all here.
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/5qGb9odP6 - for intels `Block RThroughput: <=106.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=34.8`
So pick cost of `106`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/KrWcv4Ph7 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =58.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=20.5`
So pick cost of `58`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110593
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/3Tc5s897j - for intels `Block RThroughput: =39.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=13.5`
So pick cost of `39`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/fo1h9E67e - for intels `Block RThroughput: =21.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=12.0`
So pick cost of `21`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110592
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1Wcaf9c7T - for intels `Block RThroughput: =9.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.5`
So pick cost of `9`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1Wcaf9c7T - for intels `Block RThroughput: =15.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=6.0`
So pick cost of `15`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110591
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/bhscej4WM - for intels `Block RThroughput: =13.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=7.0`
So pick cost of `13`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Yf4Pfnxbq - for intels `Block RThroughput: =10.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.5`
So pick cost of `10`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110590
This reverts commit 8fdac7cb7a.
The issue causing the revert has been fixed a while ago in 60b852092c.
Original message:
Now that SCEVExpander can preserve LCSSA form,
we do not have to worry about LCSSA form when
trying to look through PHIs. SCEVExpander will take
care of inserting LCSSA PHI nodes as required.
This increases precision of the analysis in some cases.
Reviewed By: mkazantsev, bmahjour
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D71539
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For this tuple, measuring becomes problematic since there's a lot of spilling going on,
but apparently all these memory ops do not affect worst-case estimate at all here.
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/zP4hd8MT6 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =150.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=59`
So pick cost of `150`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/vKb8zTK8E - for intels `Block RThroughput: =32.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=24.0`
So pick cost of `64`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110548
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Wd9cKab83 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =75.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=29.5`
So pick cost of `75`. (note that `# 32-byte Reload` does not affect throughput there.)
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Wd9cKab83 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =32.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=12.0`
So pick cost of `32`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110543
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/dd8T5P471 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =33.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=14.5`
So pick cost of `33`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/zPxcKWhn4 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =10.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=6.0`
So pick cost of `10`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110541
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/rnsf639Wh - for intels `Block RThroughput: =17.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=7.5`
So pick cost of `17`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/565KKrcY6 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =2.0`
So pick cost of `6`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110537
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/5EYc6r9nh - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.0`
So pick cost of `6`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/z61e5d6GE - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110536
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/q6GbK89br - for intels `Block RThroughput: =18.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=7.0`
So pick cost of `18`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Yzfoo5TnW - for intels `Block RThroughput: =8.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=4.0`
So pick cost of `8`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110507
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Y1E7qnjz8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =9.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=3.5`
So pick cost of `9`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Y1E7qnjz8 - for intels `Block RThroughput: =4.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `4`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110506
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/e5YE99a4P - for intels `Block RThroughput: =6.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: =2.0`
So pick cost of `6`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/3vM4KsE1n - for intels `Block RThroughput: =3.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=2.0`
So pick cost of `3`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110505
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/1j3nf3dro - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/4n1zvP37j - for intels `Block RThroughput: =1.0`; for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=0.5`
So pick cost of `1`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D110504
The only sched models that for cpu's that support avx2
but not avx512 are: haswell, broadwell, skylake, zen1-3
For load we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/M8vEKs5jY - for intels `Block RThroughput: =2.0`;
for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=1.0`
So pick cost of `2`.
For store we have:
https://godbolt.org/z/Kx1nKz7je - for intels `Block RThroughput: =1.0`;
for ryzens, `Block RThroughput: <=0.5`
So pick cost of `1`.
I'm directly using the shuffling asm the llc produced,
without any manual fixups that may be needed
to ensure sequential execution.
Reviewed By: RKSimon
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D103144
Roman Lebedev