Commit Graph

34 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Craig Topper aa5eb2fbaa [X86] Force floating point values in constant pool decoding to print in scientific notation so they can't be confused with integers.
When the floating point constants are whole numbers they have no decimal point so look like integers, but mean something very different in something like an 'and' instruction.

Ideally we would just print a decimal point and a 0, but I couldn't see how to make APFloat::toString do that.

llvm-svn: 345488
2018-10-29 04:52:04 +00:00
Roman Lebedev a5baf86744 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
2018-10-27 20:46:30 +00:00
Roman Lebedev a51921877a [NFC][X86] Baseline tests for AMD BdVer2 (Piledriver) Scheduler model
Adding the baseline tests in a preparatory NFC commit,
so that the actual commit shows the *diff*.

Yes, i'm aware that a few of these codegen-based sched tests
are testing wrong instructions, i will fix that afterwards.

For https://reviews.llvm.org/D52779

llvm-svn: 345462
2018-10-27 20:36:11 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim ad23f270db [X86] Standardize floating point assembly comments
Consistently try to use APFloat::toString for floating point constant comments to get rid of differences between Constant / ConstantDataSequential values - it should help stop some of the linux-windows buildbot failures matching NaN/INF etc. as well.

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D52702

llvm-svn: 343562
2018-10-02 09:08:51 +00:00
Clement Courbet 7db69cc08a [X86] Fix skylake server scheduling info.
Summary:
This fixes most of the scheduling info for SKX vector operations.
I had to split a lot of the YMM/ZMM classes into separate classes for YMM and ZMM.

The before/after llvm-exegesis analysis are in the phabricator diff.

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47721

llvm-svn: 334407
2018-06-11 14:37:53 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim f3ae50fca2 [X86] Split WriteFRcp/WriteFRsqrt/WriteFSqrt schedule classes
WriteFRcp/WriteFRsqrt are split to support scalar, XMM and YMM/ZMM instructions.

WriteFSqrt is split into single/double/long-double sizes and scalar, XMM, YMM and ZMM instructions.

This removes all InstrRW overrides for these instructions.

NOTE: There were a couple of typos in the Znver1 model - notably a 1cy throughput for SQRT that is highly unlikely and doesn't tally with Agner.

NOTE: I had to add Agner's numbers for several targets for WriteFSqrt80.
llvm-svn: 331629
2018-05-07 11:50:44 +00:00
Craig Topper cb2abc7977 [X86] Enable reciprocal estimates for v16f32 vectors by using VRCP14PS/VRSQRT14PS
Summary:
The legacy VRCPPS/VRSQRTPS instructions aren't available in 512-bit versions. The new increased precision versions are. So we can use those to implement v16f32 reciprocal estimates.

For KNL CPUs we can probably use VRCP28PS/VRSQRT28PS and avoid the NR step altogether, but I leave that for a future patch.

Reviewers: spatel

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: RKSimon, llvm-commits, mehdi_amini

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D46498

llvm-svn: 331606
2018-05-06 17:48:21 +00:00
Craig Topper b02e3dec4b [X86] Add test cases for reciprocal estimation for v16f32 vectors with AVX512F.
We should be able to use the vrsqrt14ps and vrcp14ps instructions for these cases.

llvm-svn: 331605
2018-05-06 17:45:40 +00:00
Craig Topper d88204fe1b [X86] Add comments to the end of FMA3 instructions to make the operation clear
Summary:
There are 3 different operand orders for FMA instructions so figuring out the exact operation being performed requires a lot of thought.

This patch adds a comment to the end of the assembly line to print the exact operation.

I think I've got all the instructions in here except the ones with builtin rounding.

I didn't update all tests, but I assume we can get them as we regenerate tests in the future.

Reviewers: spatel, v_klochkov, RKSimon

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D44345

llvm-svn: 327225
2018-03-10 21:30:46 +00:00
Craig Topper 4e57776fb2 [X86] Correct the _Int part of more scheduler model instrexes. Put _b in the correct order relative to _Int
llvm-svn: 320282
2017-12-10 03:16:38 +00:00
Craig Topper 391c6f9507 [X86] Fix bad regular expressions in the scheduler models. Question marks should be outside of multicharacter parenthesized expressions
If the question mark is inside the parentheses it only applies to the single character proceeding it.

I had to make a few additional cleanups to fix some duplicate warnings that were exposed by fixing this.

llvm-svn: 320279
2017-12-10 01:24:08 +00:00
Gadi Haber 2cf601f28f [X86][Haswell]: Updating the scheduling information for the Haswell subtarget.
Updated the scheduling information for the Haswell subtarget with the following changes:

Regrouped the instructions after adding appropriate load + store latencies.
Added scheduling for missing instructions such as the GATHER instrs.
The changes were made after revisiting the latencies impact of all memory uOps.

Reviewers: RKSimon, zvi, craig.topper, apilipenko
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40021

Change-Id: Iaf6c1f5169add1552845a8a566af4e5a359217a7
llvm-svn: 320137
2017-12-08 09:48:44 +00:00
Francis Visoiu Mistrih 25528d6de7 [CodeGen] Unify MBB reference format in both MIR and debug output
As part of the unification of the debug format and the MIR format, print
MBB references as '%bb.5'.

The MIR printer prints the IR name of a MBB only for block definitions.

* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)->getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(*\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#" << ([a-zA-Z0-9_]+)\.getNumber\(\)/" << printMBBReference(\1)/g'
* find . \( -name "*.txt" -o -name "*.s" -o -name "*.mir" -o -name "*.cpp" -o -name "*.h" -o -name "*.ll" \) -type f -print0 | xargs -0 sed -i '' -E 's/BB#([0-9]+)/%bb.\1/g'
* grep -nr 'BB#' and fix

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D40422

llvm-svn: 319665
2017-12-04 17:18:51 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim 3e5987cf8d [X86][AVX512] Tag RCP/RSQRT/GETEXP instructions scheduler classes
llvm-svn: 319418
2017-11-30 10:48:47 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim 4d2c703492 [X86][AVX512] Tag RCP/RSQRT/GETEXP instructions scheduler classes (REVERSION)
Accidental commit of incomplete patch

llvm-svn: 319346
2017-11-29 19:37:38 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim 87034cb498 [X86][AVX512] Tag RCP/RSQRT/GETEXP instructions scheduler classes
llvm-svn: 319338
2017-11-29 19:19:59 +00:00
Craig Topper 4e2f53511a [X86] Remove some more RCP and RSQRT patterns from InstrAVX512.td that I missed in r317413.
llvm-svn: 317441
2017-11-05 21:14:05 +00:00
Craig Topper 692c8efe30 [X86] Don't use RCP14 and RSQRT14 for reciprocal estimations or for legacy SSE rcp/rsqrt intrinsics when AVX512 features are enabled.
Summary:
AVX512 added RCP14 and RSQRT instructions which improve accuracy over the legacy RCP and RSQRT instruction, but not enough accuracy to remove the need for a Newton Raphson refinement.

Currently we use these new instructions for the legacy packed SSE instrinics, but not the scalar instrinsics. And we use it for fast math optimization of division and reciprocal sqrt.

I think switching the legacy instrinsics maybe surprising to the user since it changes the answer based on which processor you're using regardless of any fastmath settings. It's also weird that we did something different between scalar and packed.

As far at the reciprocal estimation, I think it creates unnecessary deltas in our output behavior (and prevents EVEX->VEX). A little playing around with gcc and icc and godbolt suggest they don't change which instructions they use here.

This patch adds new X86ISD nodes for the RCP14/RSQRT14 and uses those for the new intrinsics. Leaving the old intrinsics to use the old instructions.

Going forward I think our focus should be on
-Supporting 512-bit vectors, which will have to use the RCP14/RSQRT14.
-Using RSQRT28/RCP28 to remove the Newton Raphson step on processors with AVX512ER
-Supporting double precision.

Reviewers: zvi, DavidKreitzer, RKSimon

Reviewed By: RKSimon

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D39583

llvm-svn: 317413
2017-11-04 18:26:41 +00:00
Gadi Haber 684944b822 [X86][SKX] Adding the scheduling information for the SKX target.
Adding the scheduling information for the SkylakeServer (SKX) target.

This patch adds the instruction scheduling information for the SkylakeServer (SKX) architecture target by adding the file X86SchedSkylakeServer.td located under the X86 Target.
We used the scheduling information retrieved from the Skylake architects in order to create the file.
The scheduling information includes latency, number of micro-Ops and used ports by each SKL instruction.

The patch continues the scheduling replacement and insertion effort started with the SNB target in r310792, the HSW target in r311879 and the SkylakeClient (SKL) target in rL313613.

Please expect some performance fluctuations due to code alignment effects.

Reviewers: zvi, RKSimon, craig.topper, chandlerc, aymanmu
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D38443

Change-Id: I5c228fcc09e9e5a99b6116e62b356c4f9b971185
llvm-svn: 315175
2017-10-08 12:52:54 +00:00
Gadi Haber 6f8fbf4b86 [X86][Skylake] Adding the scheduling information for the SkylakeClient target
This patch adds the instruction scheduling information for the SkylakeClient (SKL) architecture target by adding the file X86SchedSkylakeClient.td located under the X86 Target.
We used the scheduling information retrieved from the Skylake architects in order to create the file.
The scheduling information includes latency, number of micro-Ops and used ports by each SKL instruction.
The patch continues the scheduling replacement and insertion effort started with the SNB target in r307529 and r310792 and for HSW in r311879.

Please expect some performance fluctuations due to code alignment effects.

Reviewers: craig.topper, zvi, chandlerc, igorb, aymanmus, RKSimon, delena
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D37294

llvm-svn: 313613
2017-09-19 06:19:27 +00:00
Gadi Haber d76f7b824e [X86][Haswell] Updating HSW instruction scheduling information
This patch completely replaces the instruction scheduling information for the Haswell architecture target by modifying the file X86SchedHaswell.td located under the X86 Target.
We used the scheduling information retrieved from the Haswell architects in order to replace and modify the existing scheduling.
The patch continues the scheduling replacement effort started with the SNB target in r307529 and r310792.
Information includes latency, number of micro-Ops and used ports by each HSW instruction.

Please expect some performance fluctuations due to code alignment effects.

Reviewers: RKSimon, zvi, aymanmus, craig.topper, m_zuckerman, igorb, dim, chandlerc, aaboud

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36663

llvm-svn: 311879
2017-08-28 10:04:16 +00:00
Gadi Haber bed2c50607 [X86][SandyBridge] Additional updates to the SNB instructions scheduling information
This is a continuation patch for commit r307529 which completely replaces the scheduling information for the SandyBridge architecture target by modifying the file X86SchedSandyBridge.td located under the X86 Target (see also https://reviews.llvm.org/D35019).

In this patch we added the scheduling information of additional SNB instructions that were missing from the patch commit r307529, fixed the scheduling of several resource groups that include only port0 instead of port05 (i.e., port0 OR port5) and fixed several incorrect instructions' scheduling in the r307529 commit.

The patch also includes the X87 instructions which were missing in previous patch commit r307529 as reported in bugzilla bug 34080.

Reviewers: zvi, RKSimon, chandlerc, igorb, m_zuckerman, craig.topper, aymanmus, dim

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D36388

llvm-svn: 310792
2017-08-13 13:59:24 +00:00
Andrew V. Tischenko ae9d6db769 [X86] Model 256-bit AVX instructions in the AMD Jaguar scheduler Part-1 (PR28573).
The new version of the model is definitely faster.

Differential Revision:
https://reviews.llvm.org/D35198

llvm-svn: 307552
2017-07-10 16:36:03 +00:00
Gadi Haber f4d154c089 This patch completely replaces the scheduling information for the SandyBridge architecture target by modifying the file X86SchedSandyBridge.td located under the X86 Target.
The SandyBridge architects have provided us with a more accurate information about each instruction latency, number of uOPs and used ports and I used it to replace the existing estimated SNB instructions scheduling and to add missing scheduling information.

Please note that the patch extensively affects the X86 MC instr scheduling for SNB.

Also note that this patch will be followed by additional patches for the remaining target architectures HSW, IVB, BDW, SKL and SKX.

The updated and extended information about each instruction includes the following details:
•static latency of the instruction
•number of uOps from which the instruction consists of
•all ports used by the instruction's' uOPs

For example, the following code dictates that instructions, ADC64mr, ADC8mr, SBB64mr, SBB8mr have a static latency of 9 cycles. Each of these instructions is decoded into 6 micro operations which use ports 4, ports 2 or 3 and port 0 and ports 0 or 1 or 5:

def SBWriteResGroup94 : SchedWriteRes<[SBPort4,SBPort23,SBPort0,SBPort015]> {
let Latency = 9;
let NumMicroOps = 6;
let ResourceCycles = [1,2,2,1];

}
def: InstRW<[SBWriteResGroup94], (instregex "ADC64mr")>;
def: InstRW<[SBWriteResGroup94], (instregex "ADC8mr")>;
def: InstRW<[SBWriteResGroup94], (instregex "SBB64mr")>;
def: InstRW<[SBWriteResGroup94], (instregex "SBB8mr")>;

Note that apart for the header, most of the X86SchedSandyBridge.td file was generated by a script.

Reviewers: zvi, chandlerc, RKSimon, m_zuckerman, craig.topper, igorb

Differential Revision:  https://reviews.llvm.org/D35019#inline-304691

llvm-svn: 307529
2017-07-10 09:53:16 +00:00
Craig Topper ad140cfb68 [X86] Add comment string for broadcast loads from the constant pool.
Summary:
When broadcasting from the constant pool its useful to print out the final vector similar to what we do for normal moves from the constant pool.

I changed only a couple tests that were broadcast focused. One of them had been previously hand tweaked after running the script so that it could check the constant pool declaration. But I think this patch makes that unnecessary now since we can check the comment instead.

Reviewers: spatel, RKSimon, zvi

Reviewed By: spatel

Subscribers: llvm-commits

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34923

llvm-svn: 307062
2017-07-04 05:46:11 +00:00
Michael Zuckerman f66840020c Reverting commit 306414 on behalf of @gadi.haber
llvm-svn: 306532
2017-06-28 11:23:31 +00:00
Gadi Haber 13759a7ed6 Updated and extended the information about each instruction in HSW and SNB to include the following data:
•static latency
•number of uOps from which the instructions consists
•all ports used by the instruction

Reviewers: 
 RKSimon 
 zvi  
aymanmus  
m_zuckerman 

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33897
 

llvm-svn: 306414
2017-06-27 15:05:13 +00:00
Andrew V. Tischenko 75745d0c3e This patch closes PR#32216: Better testing of schedule model instruction latencies/throughputs.
The details are here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D30941

llvm-svn: 300311
2017-04-14 07:44:23 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim a3362a1c9e [X86][SSE] Added chained FDIV test cases for D26855
Tests to demonstrate throughput-latency decision between div and rcp on faster hardware such as Haswell

llvm-svn: 294750
2017-02-10 14:56:12 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim 05ac1f70be [X86][SSE] Added extra FMA/NO-FMA reciprocal test cases for D26855
Test for expected codegen for nr reciprocal cases with/without FMA

llvm-svn: 294587
2017-02-09 14:14:06 +00:00
Simon Pilgrim 361f8d7869 [X86][SSE] Add target cpu specific reciprocal tests
As discussed on D26855, check individual cpu targets as part of the investigation into moving more combines to MachineCombiner

llvm-svn: 294128
2017-02-05 18:26:17 +00:00
Andrew V. Tischenko 5f643ad847 Extra coverage tests to demonstrate fixes in D72618 and D26855
llvm-svn: 289931
2016-12-16 09:56:02 +00:00
Alexey Bataev 2db6045b29 Revert "[TESTS] Initial commit of tests, by Andrew Tischenko"
This reverts commit ee709f8988653a0334fbf100cdbbdd83a3933347.

llvm-svn: 289814
2016-12-15 12:26:18 +00:00
Alexey Bataev 67c90c7d95 [TESTS] Initial commit of tests, by Andrew Tischenko
llvm-svn: 289807
2016-12-15 11:48:24 +00:00