On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de> wrote:
>
> They are suspiciously low (compared to say scalar_stmt_cost) and with
> them and the fix for the vectorizer cost model to properly account
> scalar stmt costs (and thus correctly dealing with odd costs as bdverN
> have) we regress 252.eon because we consider a loop vectorized and
> peeled for alignment loop profitable which clearly isn't.
>
> Bootstrap and regtest running on x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu. I've
> tested with all b[dt]verN -marchs and the slp-pr56812.cc testcase
> (yes, we've run into a similar issue earlier). I've also put the
> patch on our SPEC tester to look for fallout.
>
> It really looks like the costs were derived by some automatic
> searching of the parameter space and thus "optimizing" for bugs
> in the vectorizer cost model that have meanwhile been fixed
> (scalar stmt cost == 6 but scalar load/store cost == 4!?). It is
> not a good idea to put in paramters that you can't make sense of
> from an architectural point of view (yes, taken/not-taken branch
> is somewhat bogus kinds, I'd like to change that to correctly
> predicted / wrongly predicted for GCC 6).
>
> Ok for trunk and 4.9 branch?
I have added a person from AMD to comment on the decision.
Otherwise, the patch looks OK, but please wait a couple of days for
possible comments.
Thanks,
Uros.
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>
> 2015-04-07 Richard Biener <rguent...@suse.de>
>
> PR target/65660
> * config/i386/i386.c (bdver1_cost): Double cond_taken_branch_cost
> and cond_not_taken_branch_cost to 4 and 2.
> (bdver2_cost): Likewise.
> (bdver3_cost): Likewise.
> (bdver4_cost): Likewise.
>
> Index: gcc/config/i386/i386.c
> ===================================================================
> *** gcc/config/i386/i386.c (revision 221888)
> --- gcc/config/i386/i386.c (working copy)
> *************** const struct processor_costs bdver1_cost
> *** 1025,1032 ****
> 4, /* vec_align_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_unalign_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_store_cost. */
> ! 2, /* cond_taken_branch_cost. */
> ! 1, /* cond_not_taken_branch_cost. */
> };
>
> /* BDVER2 has optimized REP instruction for medium sized blocks, but for
> --- 1025,1032 ----
> 4, /* vec_align_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_unalign_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_store_cost. */
> ! 4, /* cond_taken_branch_cost. */
> ! 2, /* cond_not_taken_branch_cost. */
> };
>
> /* BDVER2 has optimized REP instruction for medium sized blocks, but for
> *************** const struct processor_costs bdver2_cost
> *** 1121,1128 ****
> 4, /* vec_align_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_unalign_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_store_cost. */
> ! 2, /* cond_taken_branch_cost. */
> ! 1, /* cond_not_taken_branch_cost. */
> };
>
>
> --- 1121,1128 ----
> 4, /* vec_align_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_unalign_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_store_cost. */
> ! 4, /* cond_taken_branch_cost. */
> ! 2, /* cond_not_taken_branch_cost. */
> };
>
>
> *************** struct processor_costs bdver3_cost = {
> *** 1208,1215 ****
> 4, /* vec_align_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_unalign_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_store_cost. */
> ! 2, /* cond_taken_branch_cost. */
> ! 1, /* cond_not_taken_branch_cost. */
> };
>
> /* BDVER4 has optimized REP instruction for medium sized blocks, but for
> --- 1208,1215 ----
> 4, /* vec_align_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_unalign_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_store_cost. */
> ! 4, /* cond_taken_branch_cost. */
> ! 2, /* cond_not_taken_branch_cost. */
> };
>
> /* BDVER4 has optimized REP instruction for medium sized blocks, but for
> *************** struct processor_costs bdver4_cost = {
> *** 1294,1301 ****
> 4, /* vec_align_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_unalign_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_store_cost. */
> ! 2, /* cond_taken_branch_cost. */
> ! 1, /* cond_not_taken_branch_cost. */
> };
>
> /* BTVER1 has optimized REP instruction for medium sized blocks, but for
> --- 1294,1301 ----
> 4, /* vec_align_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_unalign_load_cost. */
> 4, /* vec_store_cost. */
> ! 4, /* cond_taken_branch_cost. */
> ! 2, /* cond_not_taken_branch_cost. */
> };
>
> /* BTVER1 has optimized REP instruction for medium sized blocks, but for
