forked from OSchip/llvm-project
770 lines
33 KiB
ReStructuredText
770 lines
33 KiB
ReStructuredText
llvm-mca - LLVM Machine Code Analyzer
|
|
=====================================
|
|
|
|
SYNOPSIS
|
|
--------
|
|
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca` [*options*] [input]
|
|
|
|
DESCRIPTION
|
|
-----------
|
|
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca` is a performance analysis tool that uses information
|
|
available in LLVM (e.g. scheduling models) to statically measure the performance
|
|
of machine code in a specific CPU.
|
|
|
|
Performance is measured in terms of throughput as well as processor resource
|
|
consumption. The tool currently works for processors with an out-of-order
|
|
backend, for which there is a scheduling model available in LLVM.
|
|
|
|
The main goal of this tool is not just to predict the performance of the code
|
|
when run on the target, but also help with diagnosing potential performance
|
|
issues.
|
|
|
|
Given an assembly code sequence, :program:`llvm-mca` estimates the Instructions
|
|
Per Cycle (IPC), as well as hardware resource pressure. The analysis and
|
|
reporting style were inspired by the IACA tool from Intel.
|
|
|
|
For example, you can compile code with clang, output assembly, and pipe it
|
|
directly into :program:`llvm-mca` for analysis:
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: bash
|
|
|
|
$ clang foo.c -O2 -target x86_64-unknown-unknown -S -o - | llvm-mca -mcpu=btver2
|
|
|
|
Or for Intel syntax:
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: bash
|
|
|
|
$ clang foo.c -O2 -target x86_64-unknown-unknown -mllvm -x86-asm-syntax=intel -S -o - | llvm-mca -mcpu=btver2
|
|
|
|
OPTIONS
|
|
-------
|
|
|
|
If ``input`` is "``-``" or omitted, :program:`llvm-mca` reads from standard
|
|
input. Otherwise, it will read from the specified filename.
|
|
|
|
If the :option:`-o` option is omitted, then :program:`llvm-mca` will send its output
|
|
to standard output if the input is from standard input. If the :option:`-o`
|
|
option specifies "``-``", then the output will also be sent to standard output.
|
|
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -help
|
|
|
|
Print a summary of command line options.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -mtriple=<target triple>
|
|
|
|
Specify a target triple string.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -march=<arch>
|
|
|
|
Specify the architecture for which to analyze the code. It defaults to the
|
|
host default target.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -mcpu=<cpuname>
|
|
|
|
Specify the processor for which to analyze the code. By default, the cpu name
|
|
is autodetected from the host.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -output-asm-variant=<variant id>
|
|
|
|
Specify the output assembly variant for the report generated by the tool.
|
|
On x86, possible values are [0, 1]. A value of 0 (vic. 1) for this flag enables
|
|
the AT&T (vic. Intel) assembly format for the code printed out by the tool in
|
|
the analysis report.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -dispatch=<width>
|
|
|
|
Specify a different dispatch width for the processor. The dispatch width
|
|
defaults to field 'IssueWidth' in the processor scheduling model. If width is
|
|
zero, then the default dispatch width is used.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -register-file-size=<size>
|
|
|
|
Specify the size of the register file. When specified, this flag limits how
|
|
many physical registers are available for register renaming purposes. A value
|
|
of zero for this flag means "unlimited number of physical registers".
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -iterations=<number of iterations>
|
|
|
|
Specify the number of iterations to run. If this flag is set to 0, then the
|
|
tool sets the number of iterations to a default value (i.e. 100).
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -noalias=<bool>
|
|
|
|
If set, the tool assumes that loads and stores don't alias. This is the
|
|
default behavior.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -lqueue=<load queue size>
|
|
|
|
Specify the size of the load queue in the load/store unit emulated by the tool.
|
|
By default, the tool assumes an unbound number of entries in the load queue.
|
|
A value of zero for this flag is ignored, and the default load queue size is
|
|
used instead.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -squeue=<store queue size>
|
|
|
|
Specify the size of the store queue in the load/store unit emulated by the
|
|
tool. By default, the tool assumes an unbound number of entries in the store
|
|
queue. A value of zero for this flag is ignored, and the default store queue
|
|
size is used instead.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -timeline
|
|
|
|
Enable the timeline view.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -timeline-max-iterations=<iterations>
|
|
|
|
Limit the number of iterations to print in the timeline view. By default, the
|
|
timeline view prints information for up to 10 iterations.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -timeline-max-cycles=<cycles>
|
|
|
|
Limit the number of cycles in the timeline view. By default, the number of
|
|
cycles is set to 80.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -resource-pressure
|
|
|
|
Enable the resource pressure view. This is enabled by default.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -register-file-stats
|
|
|
|
Enable register file usage statistics.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -dispatch-stats
|
|
|
|
Enable extra dispatch statistics. This view collects and analyzes instruction
|
|
dispatch events, as well as static/dynamic dispatch stall events. This view
|
|
is disabled by default.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -scheduler-stats
|
|
|
|
Enable extra scheduler statistics. This view collects and analyzes instruction
|
|
issue events. This view is disabled by default.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -retire-stats
|
|
|
|
Enable extra retire control unit statistics. This view is disabled by default.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -instruction-info
|
|
|
|
Enable the instruction info view. This is enabled by default.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -all-stats
|
|
|
|
Print all hardware statistics. This enables extra statistics related to the
|
|
dispatch logic, the hardware schedulers, the register file(s), and the retire
|
|
control unit. This option is disabled by default.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -all-views
|
|
|
|
Enable all the view.
|
|
|
|
.. option:: -instruction-tables
|
|
|
|
Prints resource pressure information based on the static information
|
|
available from the processor model. This differs from the resource pressure
|
|
view because it doesn't require that the code is simulated. It instead prints
|
|
the theoretical uniform distribution of resource pressure for every
|
|
instruction in sequence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXIT STATUS
|
|
-----------
|
|
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca` returns 0 on success. Otherwise, an error message is printed
|
|
to standard error, and the tool returns 1.
|
|
|
|
USING MARKERS TO ANALYZE SPECIFIC CODE BLOCKS
|
|
---------------------------------------------
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca` allows for the optional usage of special code comments to
|
|
mark regions of the assembly code to be analyzed. A comment starting with
|
|
substring ``LLVM-MCA-BEGIN`` marks the beginning of a code region. A comment
|
|
starting with substring ``LLVM-MCA-END`` marks the end of a code region. For
|
|
example:
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: none
|
|
|
|
# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN My Code Region
|
|
...
|
|
# LLVM-MCA-END
|
|
|
|
Multiple regions can be specified provided that they do not overlap. A code
|
|
region can have an optional description. If no user-defined region is specified,
|
|
then :program:`llvm-mca` assumes a default region which contains every
|
|
instruction in the input file. Every region is analyzed in isolation, and the
|
|
final performance report is the union of all the reports generated for every
|
|
code region.
|
|
|
|
Inline assembly directives may be used from source code to annotate the
|
|
assembly text:
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: c++
|
|
|
|
int foo(int a, int b) {
|
|
__asm volatile("# LLVM-MCA-BEGIN foo");
|
|
a += 42;
|
|
__asm volatile("# LLVM-MCA-END");
|
|
a *= b;
|
|
return a;
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
HOW LLVM-MCA WORKS
|
|
------------------
|
|
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca` takes assembly code as input. The assembly code is parsed
|
|
into a sequence of MCInst with the help of the existing LLVM target assembly
|
|
parsers. The parsed sequence of MCInst is then analyzed by a ``Pipeline`` module
|
|
to generate a performance report.
|
|
|
|
The Pipeline module simulates the execution of the machine code sequence in a
|
|
loop of iterations (default is 100). During this process, the pipeline collects
|
|
a number of execution related statistics. At the end of this process, the
|
|
pipeline generates and prints a report from the collected statistics.
|
|
|
|
Here is an example of a performance report generated by the tool for a
|
|
dot-product of two packed float vectors of four elements. The analysis is
|
|
conducted for target x86, cpu btver2. The following result can be produced via
|
|
the following command using the example located at
|
|
``test/tools/llvm-mca/X86/BtVer2/dot-product.s``:
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: bash
|
|
|
|
$ llvm-mca -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mcpu=btver2 -iterations=300 dot-product.s
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: none
|
|
|
|
Iterations: 300
|
|
Instructions: 900
|
|
Total Cycles: 610
|
|
Total uOps: 900
|
|
|
|
Dispatch Width: 2
|
|
uOps Per Cycle: 1.48
|
|
IPC: 1.48
|
|
Block RThroughput: 2.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Instruction Info:
|
|
[1]: #uOps
|
|
[2]: Latency
|
|
[3]: RThroughput
|
|
[4]: MayLoad
|
|
[5]: MayStore
|
|
[6]: HasSideEffects (U)
|
|
|
|
[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] Instructions:
|
|
1 2 1.00 vmulps %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
|
|
1 3 1.00 vhaddps %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
|
|
1 3 1.00 vhaddps %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resources:
|
|
[0] - JALU0
|
|
[1] - JALU1
|
|
[2] - JDiv
|
|
[3] - JFPA
|
|
[4] - JFPM
|
|
[5] - JFPU0
|
|
[6] - JFPU1
|
|
[7] - JLAGU
|
|
[8] - JMul
|
|
[9] - JSAGU
|
|
[10] - JSTC
|
|
[11] - JVALU0
|
|
[12] - JVALU1
|
|
[13] - JVIMUL
|
|
|
|
|
|
Resource pressure per iteration:
|
|
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13]
|
|
- - - 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 - - - - - - -
|
|
|
|
Resource pressure by instruction:
|
|
[0] [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] Instructions:
|
|
- - - - 1.00 - 1.00 - - - - - - - vmulps %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
|
|
- - - 1.00 - 1.00 - - - - - - - - vhaddps %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
|
|
- - - 1.00 - 1.00 - - - - - - - - vhaddps %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
|
|
|
|
According to this report, the dot-product kernel has been executed 300 times,
|
|
for a total of 900 simulated instructions. The total number of simulated micro
|
|
opcodes (uOps) is also 900.
|
|
|
|
The report is structured in three main sections. The first section collects a
|
|
few performance numbers; the goal of this section is to give a very quick
|
|
overview of the performance throughput. Important performance indicators are
|
|
**IPC**, **uOps Per Cycle**, and **Block RThroughput** (Block Reciprocal
|
|
Throughput).
|
|
|
|
IPC is computed dividing the total number of simulated instructions by the total
|
|
number of cycles. In the absence of loop-carried data dependencies, the
|
|
observed IPC tends to a theoretical maximum which can be computed by dividing
|
|
the number of instructions of a single iteration by the *Block RThroughput*.
|
|
|
|
Field 'uOps Per Cycle' is computed dividing the total number of simulated micro
|
|
opcodes by the total number of cycles. A delta between Dispatch Width and this
|
|
field is an indicator of a performance issue. In the absence of loop-carried
|
|
data dependencies, the observed 'uOps Per Cycle' should tend to a theoretical
|
|
maximum throughput which can be computed by dividing the number of uOps of a
|
|
single iteration by the *Block RThroughput*.
|
|
|
|
Field *uOps Per Cycle* is bounded from above by the dispatch width. That is
|
|
because the dispatch width limits the maximum size of a dispatch group. Both IPC
|
|
and 'uOps Per Cycle' are limited by the amount of hardware parallelism. The
|
|
availability of hardware resources affects the resource pressure distribution,
|
|
and it limits the number of instructions that can be executed in parallel every
|
|
cycle. A delta between Dispatch Width and the theoretical maximum uOps per
|
|
Cycle (computed by dividing the number of uOps of a single iteration by the
|
|
*Block RTrhoughput*) is an indicator of a performance bottleneck caused by the
|
|
lack of hardware resources.
|
|
In general, the lower the Block RThroughput, the better.
|
|
|
|
In this example, ``uOps per iteration/Block RThroughput`` is 1.50. Since there
|
|
are no loop-carried dependencies, the observed *uOps Per Cycle* is expected to
|
|
approach 1.50 when the number of iterations tends to infinity. The delta between
|
|
the Dispatch Width (2.00), and the theoretical maximum uOp throughput (1.50) is
|
|
an indicator of a performance bottleneck caused by the lack of hardware
|
|
resources, and the *Resource pressure view* can help to identify the problematic
|
|
resource usage.
|
|
|
|
The second section of the report shows the latency and reciprocal
|
|
throughput of every instruction in the sequence. That section also reports
|
|
extra information related to the number of micro opcodes, and opcode properties
|
|
(i.e., 'MayLoad', 'MayStore', and 'HasSideEffects').
|
|
|
|
The third section is the *Resource pressure view*. This view reports
|
|
the average number of resource cycles consumed every iteration by instructions
|
|
for every processor resource unit available on the target. Information is
|
|
structured in two tables. The first table reports the number of resource cycles
|
|
spent on average every iteration. The second table correlates the resource
|
|
cycles to the machine instruction in the sequence. For example, every iteration
|
|
of the instruction vmulps always executes on resource unit [6]
|
|
(JFPU1 - floating point pipeline #1), consuming an average of 1 resource cycle
|
|
per iteration. Note that on AMD Jaguar, vector floating-point multiply can
|
|
only be issued to pipeline JFPU1, while horizontal floating-point additions can
|
|
only be issued to pipeline JFPU0.
|
|
|
|
The resource pressure view helps with identifying bottlenecks caused by high
|
|
usage of specific hardware resources. Situations with resource pressure mainly
|
|
concentrated on a few resources should, in general, be avoided. Ideally,
|
|
pressure should be uniformly distributed between multiple resources.
|
|
|
|
Timeline View
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
The timeline view produces a detailed report of each instruction's state
|
|
transitions through an instruction pipeline. This view is enabled by the
|
|
command line option ``-timeline``. As instructions transition through the
|
|
various stages of the pipeline, their states are depicted in the view report.
|
|
These states are represented by the following characters:
|
|
|
|
* D : Instruction dispatched.
|
|
* e : Instruction executing.
|
|
* E : Instruction executed.
|
|
* R : Instruction retired.
|
|
* = : Instruction already dispatched, waiting to be executed.
|
|
* \- : Instruction executed, waiting to be retired.
|
|
|
|
Below is the timeline view for a subset of the dot-product example located in
|
|
``test/tools/llvm-mca/X86/BtVer2/dot-product.s`` and processed by
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca` using the following command:
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: bash
|
|
|
|
$ llvm-mca -mtriple=x86_64-unknown-unknown -mcpu=btver2 -iterations=3 -timeline dot-product.s
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: none
|
|
|
|
Timeline view:
|
|
012345
|
|
Index 0123456789
|
|
|
|
[0,0] DeeER. . . vmulps %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
|
|
[0,1] D==eeeER . . vhaddps %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
|
|
[0,2] .D====eeeER . vhaddps %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
|
|
[1,0] .DeeE-----R . vmulps %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
|
|
[1,1] . D=eeeE---R . vhaddps %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
|
|
[1,2] . D====eeeER . vhaddps %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
|
|
[2,0] . DeeE-----R . vmulps %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
|
|
[2,1] . D====eeeER . vhaddps %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
|
|
[2,2] . D======eeeER vhaddps %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Wait times (based on the timeline view):
|
|
[0]: Executions
|
|
[1]: Average time spent waiting in a scheduler's queue
|
|
[2]: Average time spent waiting in a scheduler's queue while ready
|
|
[3]: Average time elapsed from WB until retire stage
|
|
|
|
[0] [1] [2] [3]
|
|
0. 3 1.0 1.0 3.3 vmulps %xmm0, %xmm1, %xmm2
|
|
1. 3 3.3 0.7 1.0 vhaddps %xmm2, %xmm2, %xmm3
|
|
2. 3 5.7 0.0 0.0 vhaddps %xmm3, %xmm3, %xmm4
|
|
|
|
The timeline view is interesting because it shows instruction state changes
|
|
during execution. It also gives an idea of how the tool processes instructions
|
|
executed on the target, and how their timing information might be calculated.
|
|
|
|
The timeline view is structured in two tables. The first table shows
|
|
instructions changing state over time (measured in cycles); the second table
|
|
(named *Average Wait times*) reports useful timing statistics, which should
|
|
help diagnose performance bottlenecks caused by long data dependencies and
|
|
sub-optimal usage of hardware resources.
|
|
|
|
An instruction in the timeline view is identified by a pair of indices, where
|
|
the first index identifies an iteration, and the second index is the
|
|
instruction index (i.e., where it appears in the code sequence). Since this
|
|
example was generated using 3 iterations: ``-iterations=3``, the iteration
|
|
indices range from 0-2 inclusively.
|
|
|
|
Excluding the first and last column, the remaining columns are in cycles.
|
|
Cycles are numbered sequentially starting from 0.
|
|
|
|
From the example output above, we know the following:
|
|
|
|
* Instruction [1,0] was dispatched at cycle 1.
|
|
* Instruction [1,0] started executing at cycle 2.
|
|
* Instruction [1,0] reached the write back stage at cycle 4.
|
|
* Instruction [1,0] was retired at cycle 10.
|
|
|
|
Instruction [1,0] (i.e., vmulps from iteration #1) does not have to wait in the
|
|
scheduler's queue for the operands to become available. By the time vmulps is
|
|
dispatched, operands are already available, and pipeline JFPU1 is ready to
|
|
serve another instruction. So the instruction can be immediately issued on the
|
|
JFPU1 pipeline. That is demonstrated by the fact that the instruction only
|
|
spent 1cy in the scheduler's queue.
|
|
|
|
There is a gap of 5 cycles between the write-back stage and the retire event.
|
|
That is because instructions must retire in program order, so [1,0] has to wait
|
|
for [0,2] to be retired first (i.e., it has to wait until cycle 10).
|
|
|
|
In the example, all instructions are in a RAW (Read After Write) dependency
|
|
chain. Register %xmm2 written by vmulps is immediately used by the first
|
|
vhaddps, and register %xmm3 written by the first vhaddps is used by the second
|
|
vhaddps. Long data dependencies negatively impact the ILP (Instruction Level
|
|
Parallelism).
|
|
|
|
In the dot-product example, there are anti-dependencies introduced by
|
|
instructions from different iterations. However, those dependencies can be
|
|
removed at register renaming stage (at the cost of allocating register aliases,
|
|
and therefore consuming physical registers).
|
|
|
|
Table *Average Wait times* helps diagnose performance issues that are caused by
|
|
the presence of long latency instructions and potentially long data dependencies
|
|
which may limit the ILP. Note that :program:`llvm-mca`, by default, assumes at
|
|
least 1cy between the dispatch event and the issue event.
|
|
|
|
When the performance is limited by data dependencies and/or long latency
|
|
instructions, the number of cycles spent while in the *ready* state is expected
|
|
to be very small when compared with the total number of cycles spent in the
|
|
scheduler's queue. The difference between the two counters is a good indicator
|
|
of how large of an impact data dependencies had on the execution of the
|
|
instructions. When performance is mostly limited by the lack of hardware
|
|
resources, the delta between the two counters is small. However, the number of
|
|
cycles spent in the queue tends to be larger (i.e., more than 1-3cy),
|
|
especially when compared to other low latency instructions.
|
|
|
|
Extra Statistics to Further Diagnose Performance Issues
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
The ``-all-stats`` command line option enables extra statistics and performance
|
|
counters for the dispatch logic, the reorder buffer, the retire control unit,
|
|
and the register file.
|
|
|
|
Below is an example of ``-all-stats`` output generated by :program:`llvm-mca`
|
|
for 300 iterations of the dot-product example discussed in the previous
|
|
sections.
|
|
|
|
.. code-block:: none
|
|
|
|
Dynamic Dispatch Stall Cycles:
|
|
RAT - Register unavailable: 0
|
|
RCU - Retire tokens unavailable: 0
|
|
SCHEDQ - Scheduler full: 272 (44.6%)
|
|
LQ - Load queue full: 0
|
|
SQ - Store queue full: 0
|
|
GROUP - Static restrictions on the dispatch group: 0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dispatch Logic - number of cycles where we saw N micro opcodes dispatched:
|
|
[# dispatched], [# cycles]
|
|
0, 24 (3.9%)
|
|
1, 272 (44.6%)
|
|
2, 314 (51.5%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Schedulers - number of cycles where we saw N instructions issued:
|
|
[# issued], [# cycles]
|
|
0, 7 (1.1%)
|
|
1, 306 (50.2%)
|
|
2, 297 (48.7%)
|
|
|
|
Scheduler's queue usage:
|
|
[1] Resource name.
|
|
[2] Average number of used buffer entries.
|
|
[3] Maximum number of used buffer entries.
|
|
[4] Total number of buffer entries.
|
|
|
|
[1] [2] [3] [4]
|
|
JALU01 0 0 20
|
|
JFPU01 17 18 18
|
|
JLSAGU 0 0 12
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retire Control Unit - number of cycles where we saw N instructions retired:
|
|
[# retired], [# cycles]
|
|
0, 109 (17.9%)
|
|
1, 102 (16.7%)
|
|
2, 399 (65.4%)
|
|
|
|
Total ROB Entries: 64
|
|
Max Used ROB Entries: 35 ( 54.7% )
|
|
Average Used ROB Entries per cy: 32 ( 50.0% )
|
|
|
|
|
|
Register File statistics:
|
|
Total number of mappings created: 900
|
|
Max number of mappings used: 35
|
|
|
|
* Register File #1 -- JFpuPRF:
|
|
Number of physical registers: 72
|
|
Total number of mappings created: 900
|
|
Max number of mappings used: 35
|
|
|
|
* Register File #2 -- JIntegerPRF:
|
|
Number of physical registers: 64
|
|
Total number of mappings created: 0
|
|
Max number of mappings used: 0
|
|
|
|
If we look at the *Dynamic Dispatch Stall Cycles* table, we see the counter for
|
|
SCHEDQ reports 272 cycles. This counter is incremented every time the dispatch
|
|
logic is unable to dispatch a full group because the scheduler's queue is full.
|
|
|
|
Looking at the *Dispatch Logic* table, we see that the pipeline was only able to
|
|
dispatch two micro opcodes 51.5% of the time. The dispatch group was limited to
|
|
one micro opcode 44.6% of the cycles, which corresponds to 272 cycles. The
|
|
dispatch statistics are displayed by either using the command option
|
|
``-all-stats`` or ``-dispatch-stats``.
|
|
|
|
The next table, *Schedulers*, presents a histogram displaying a count,
|
|
representing the number of instructions issued on some number of cycles. In
|
|
this case, of the 610 simulated cycles, single instructions were issued 306
|
|
times (50.2%) and there were 7 cycles where no instructions were issued.
|
|
|
|
The *Scheduler's queue usage* table shows that the average and maximum number of
|
|
buffer entries (i.e., scheduler queue entries) used at runtime. Resource JFPU01
|
|
reached its maximum (18 of 18 queue entries). Note that AMD Jaguar implements
|
|
three schedulers:
|
|
|
|
* JALU01 - A scheduler for ALU instructions.
|
|
* JFPU01 - A scheduler floating point operations.
|
|
* JLSAGU - A scheduler for address generation.
|
|
|
|
The dot-product is a kernel of three floating point instructions (a vector
|
|
multiply followed by two horizontal adds). That explains why only the floating
|
|
point scheduler appears to be used.
|
|
|
|
A full scheduler queue is either caused by data dependency chains or by a
|
|
sub-optimal usage of hardware resources. Sometimes, resource pressure can be
|
|
mitigated by rewriting the kernel using different instructions that consume
|
|
different scheduler resources. Schedulers with a small queue are less resilient
|
|
to bottlenecks caused by the presence of long data dependencies. The scheduler
|
|
statistics are displayed by using the command option ``-all-stats`` or
|
|
``-scheduler-stats``.
|
|
|
|
The next table, *Retire Control Unit*, presents a histogram displaying a count,
|
|
representing the number of instructions retired on some number of cycles. In
|
|
this case, of the 610 simulated cycles, two instructions were retired during the
|
|
same cycle 399 times (65.4%) and there were 109 cycles where no instructions
|
|
were retired. The retire statistics are displayed by using the command option
|
|
``-all-stats`` or ``-retire-stats``.
|
|
|
|
The last table presented is *Register File statistics*. Each physical register
|
|
file (PRF) used by the pipeline is presented in this table. In the case of AMD
|
|
Jaguar, there are two register files, one for floating-point registers (JFpuPRF)
|
|
and one for integer registers (JIntegerPRF). The table shows that of the 900
|
|
instructions processed, there were 900 mappings created. Since this dot-product
|
|
example utilized only floating point registers, the JFPuPRF was responsible for
|
|
creating the 900 mappings. However, we see that the pipeline only used a
|
|
maximum of 35 of 72 available register slots at any given time. We can conclude
|
|
that the floating point PRF was the only register file used for the example, and
|
|
that it was never resource constrained. The register file statistics are
|
|
displayed by using the command option ``-all-stats`` or
|
|
``-register-file-stats``.
|
|
|
|
In this example, we can conclude that the IPC is mostly limited by data
|
|
dependencies, and not by resource pressure.
|
|
|
|
Instruction Flow
|
|
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
|
This section describes the instruction flow through the default pipeline of
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca`, as well as the functional units involved in the process.
|
|
|
|
The default pipeline implements the following sequence of stages used to
|
|
process instructions.
|
|
|
|
* Dispatch (Instruction is dispatched to the schedulers).
|
|
* Issue (Instruction is issued to the processor pipelines).
|
|
* Write Back (Instruction is executed, and results are written back).
|
|
* Retire (Instruction is retired; writes are architecturally committed).
|
|
|
|
The default pipeline only models the out-of-order portion of a processor.
|
|
Therefore, the instruction fetch and decode stages are not modeled. Performance
|
|
bottlenecks in the frontend are not diagnosed. :program:`llvm-mca` assumes that
|
|
instructions have all been decoded and placed into a queue before the simulation
|
|
start. Also, :program:`llvm-mca` does not model branch prediction.
|
|
|
|
Instruction Dispatch
|
|
""""""""""""""""""""
|
|
During the dispatch stage, instructions are picked in program order from a
|
|
queue of already decoded instructions, and dispatched in groups to the
|
|
simulated hardware schedulers.
|
|
|
|
The size of a dispatch group depends on the availability of the simulated
|
|
hardware resources. The processor dispatch width defaults to the value
|
|
of the ``IssueWidth`` in LLVM's scheduling model.
|
|
|
|
An instruction can be dispatched if:
|
|
|
|
* The size of the dispatch group is smaller than processor's dispatch width.
|
|
* There are enough entries in the reorder buffer.
|
|
* There are enough physical registers to do register renaming.
|
|
* The schedulers are not full.
|
|
|
|
Scheduling models can optionally specify which register files are available on
|
|
the processor. :program:`llvm-mca` uses that information to initialize register
|
|
file descriptors. Users can limit the number of physical registers that are
|
|
globally available for register renaming by using the command option
|
|
``-register-file-size``. A value of zero for this option means *unbounded*. By
|
|
knowing how many registers are available for renaming, the tool can predict
|
|
dispatch stalls caused by the lack of physical registers.
|
|
|
|
The number of reorder buffer entries consumed by an instruction depends on the
|
|
number of micro-opcodes specified for that instruction by the target scheduling
|
|
model. The reorder buffer is responsible for tracking the progress of
|
|
instructions that are "in-flight", and retiring them in program order. The
|
|
number of entries in the reorder buffer defaults to the value specified by field
|
|
`MicroOpBufferSize` in the target scheduling model.
|
|
|
|
Instructions that are dispatched to the schedulers consume scheduler buffer
|
|
entries. :program:`llvm-mca` queries the scheduling model to determine the set
|
|
of buffered resources consumed by an instruction. Buffered resources are
|
|
treated like scheduler resources.
|
|
|
|
Instruction Issue
|
|
"""""""""""""""""
|
|
Each processor scheduler implements a buffer of instructions. An instruction
|
|
has to wait in the scheduler's buffer until input register operands become
|
|
available. Only at that point, does the instruction becomes eligible for
|
|
execution and may be issued (potentially out-of-order) for execution.
|
|
Instruction latencies are computed by :program:`llvm-mca` with the help of the
|
|
scheduling model.
|
|
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca`'s scheduler is designed to simulate multiple processor
|
|
schedulers. The scheduler is responsible for tracking data dependencies, and
|
|
dynamically selecting which processor resources are consumed by instructions.
|
|
It delegates the management of processor resource units and resource groups to a
|
|
resource manager. The resource manager is responsible for selecting resource
|
|
units that are consumed by instructions. For example, if an instruction
|
|
consumes 1cy of a resource group, the resource manager selects one of the
|
|
available units from the group; by default, the resource manager uses a
|
|
round-robin selector to guarantee that resource usage is uniformly distributed
|
|
between all units of a group.
|
|
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca`'s scheduler internally groups instructions into three sets:
|
|
|
|
* WaitSet: a set of instructions whose operands are not ready.
|
|
* ReadySet: a set of instructions ready to execute.
|
|
* IssuedSet: a set of instructions executing.
|
|
|
|
Depending on the operands availability, instructions that are dispatched to the
|
|
scheduler are either placed into the WaitSet or into the ReadySet.
|
|
|
|
Every cycle, the scheduler checks if instructions can be moved from the WaitSet
|
|
to the ReadySet, and if instructions from the ReadySet can be issued to the
|
|
underlying pipelines. The algorithm prioritizes older instructions over younger
|
|
instructions.
|
|
|
|
Write-Back and Retire Stage
|
|
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
|
|
Issued instructions are moved from the ReadySet to the IssuedSet. There,
|
|
instructions wait until they reach the write-back stage. At that point, they
|
|
get removed from the queue and the retire control unit is notified.
|
|
|
|
When instructions are executed, the retire control unit flags the instruction as
|
|
"ready to retire."
|
|
|
|
Instructions are retired in program order. The register file is notified of the
|
|
retirement so that it can free the physical registers that were allocated for
|
|
the instruction during the register renaming stage.
|
|
|
|
Load/Store Unit and Memory Consistency Model
|
|
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
|
|
To simulate an out-of-order execution of memory operations, :program:`llvm-mca`
|
|
utilizes a simulated load/store unit (LSUnit) to simulate the speculative
|
|
execution of loads and stores.
|
|
|
|
Each load (or store) consumes an entry in the load (or store) queue. Users can
|
|
specify flags ``-lqueue`` and ``-squeue`` to limit the number of entries in the
|
|
load and store queues respectively. The queues are unbounded by default.
|
|
|
|
The LSUnit implements a relaxed consistency model for memory loads and stores.
|
|
The rules are:
|
|
|
|
1. A younger load is allowed to pass an older load only if there are no
|
|
intervening stores or barriers between the two loads.
|
|
2. A younger load is allowed to pass an older store provided that the load does
|
|
not alias with the store.
|
|
3. A younger store is not allowed to pass an older store.
|
|
4. A younger store is not allowed to pass an older load.
|
|
|
|
By default, the LSUnit optimistically assumes that loads do not alias
|
|
(`-noalias=true`) store operations. Under this assumption, younger loads are
|
|
always allowed to pass older stores. Essentially, the LSUnit does not attempt
|
|
to run any alias analysis to predict when loads and stores do not alias with
|
|
each other.
|
|
|
|
Note that, in the case of write-combining memory, rule 3 could be relaxed to
|
|
allow reordering of non-aliasing store operations. That being said, at the
|
|
moment, there is no way to further relax the memory model (``-noalias`` is the
|
|
only option). Essentially, there is no option to specify a different memory
|
|
type (e.g., write-back, write-combining, write-through; etc.) and consequently
|
|
to weaken, or strengthen, the memory model.
|
|
|
|
Other limitations are:
|
|
|
|
* The LSUnit does not know when store-to-load forwarding may occur.
|
|
* The LSUnit does not know anything about cache hierarchy and memory types.
|
|
* The LSUnit does not know how to identify serializing operations and memory
|
|
fences.
|
|
|
|
The LSUnit does not attempt to predict if a load or store hits or misses the L1
|
|
cache. It only knows if an instruction "MayLoad" and/or "MayStore." For
|
|
loads, the scheduling model provides an "optimistic" load-to-use latency (which
|
|
usually matches the load-to-use latency for when there is a hit in the L1D).
|
|
|
|
:program:`llvm-mca` does not know about serializing operations or memory-barrier
|
|
like instructions. The LSUnit conservatively assumes that an instruction which
|
|
has both "MayLoad" and unmodeled side effects behaves like a "soft"
|
|
load-barrier. That means, it serializes loads without forcing a flush of the
|
|
load queue. Similarly, instructions that "MayStore" and have unmodeled side
|
|
effects are treated like store barriers. A full memory barrier is a "MayLoad"
|
|
and "MayStore" instruction with unmodeled side effects. This is inaccurate, but
|
|
it is the best that we can do at the moment with the current information
|
|
available in LLVM.
|
|
|
|
A load/store barrier consumes one entry of the load/store queue. A load/store
|
|
barrier enforces ordering of loads/stores. A younger load cannot pass a load
|
|
barrier. Also, a younger store cannot pass a store barrier. A younger load
|
|
has to wait for the memory/load barrier to execute. A load/store barrier is
|
|
"executed" when it becomes the oldest entry in the load/store queue(s). That
|
|
also means, by construction, all of the older loads/stores have been executed.
|
|
|
|
In conclusion, the full set of load/store consistency rules are:
|
|
|
|
#. A store may not pass a previous store.
|
|
#. A store may not pass a previous load (regardless of ``-noalias``).
|
|
#. A store has to wait until an older store barrier is fully executed.
|
|
#. A load may pass a previous load.
|
|
#. A load may not pass a previous store unless ``-noalias`` is set.
|
|
#. A load has to wait until an older load barrier is fully executed.
|