On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Cesar Philippidis <ce...@codesourcery.com> wrote: > On 05/13/2016 01:13 PM, Andrew Pinski wrote: >> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 12:58 PM, Richard Biener >> <richard.guent...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On May 13, 2016 9:18:57 PM GMT+02:00, Cesar Philippidis >>> <ce...@codesourcery.com> wrote: >>>> The cse_sincos pass tries to optimize sequences such as >>>> >>>> sin (x); >>>> cos (x); >>>> >>>> into a single call to sincos, or cexpi, when available. However, the >>>> nvptx target has sin and cos instructions, albeit with some loss of >>>> precision (so it's only enabled with -ffast-math). This patch teaches >>>> cse_sincos pass to ignore sin, cos and cexpi instructions when the >>>> target can expand those calls. This yields a 6x speedup in 314.omriq >>> >from spec accel when running on Nvidia accelerators. >>>> >>>> Is this OK for trunk? >>> >>> Isn't there an optab for sincos? >> >> This is exactly what I was going to suggest. This transformation >> should be done in the back-end back to sin/cos instructions. > > I didn't realize that the 387 has sin, cos and sincos instructions, > so yeah, my original patch is bad. > > Nathan, is this patch ok for trunk and gcc-6? It adds a new sincos > pattern in the nvptx backend. I haven't testing a standalone nvptx > toolchain prior to this patch, so I'm not sure if my test results > look sane. I seem to be getting a different set of failures when I > test a clean trunk build multiple times. I attached my results > below for reference.
UNSPEC_SINCOS is unused so why add it? Thanks, Andrew Pinski > > Cesar > > g++.sum > Tests that now fail, but worked before: > > nvptx-none-run: g++.dg/abi/param1.C -std=c++14 execution test > > Tests that now work, but didn't before: > > nvptx-none-run: g++.dg/opt/pr30590.C -std=gnu++98 execution test > nvptx-none-run: g++.dg/opt/pr36187.C -std=gnu++14 execution test > > gfortran.sum > Tests that now fail, but worked before: > > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/alloc_comp_assign_10.f90 -O3 > -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions > execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/allocate_with_source_5.f90 -O1 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/func_assign_3.f90 -O3 -g execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/inline_sum_3.f90 -O1 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/inline_sum_3.f90 -O3 -g execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/internal_pack_15.f90 -O2 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/internal_pack_8.f90 -Os execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/intrinsic_ifunction_2.f90 -O0 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/intrinsic_ifunction_2.f90 -O3 > -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions > execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/intrinsic_pack_5.f90 -O3 -g execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/intrinsic_product_1.f90 -O1 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/intrinsic_verify_1.f90 -O3 -g execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/is_iostat_end_eor_1.f90 -O3 > -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions > execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/iso_c_binding_rename_1.f03 -O3 > -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions > execution test > > Tests that now work, but didn't before: > > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/char_pointer_assign.f90 -O3 > -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions > execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/char_pointer_dummy.f90 -O1 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/char_pointer_dummy.f90 -Os execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/char_result_13.f90 -O3 -g execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/char_result_2.f90 -O1 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/char_type_len.f90 -Os execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/character_array_constructor_1.f90 -O0 > execution test > nvptx-none-run: gfortran.dg/nested_allocatables_1.f90 -O3 > -fomit-frame-pointer -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions > execution test > > gcc.sum > Tests that now fail, but worked before: > > nvptx-none-run: gcc.c-torture/execute/20100316-1.c -Os execution test > nvptx-none-run: gcc.c-torture/execute/20100708-1.c -O1 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gcc.c-torture/execute/20100805-1.c -O0 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gcc.dg/torture/pr52028.c -O3 -fomit-frame-pointer > -funroll-loops -fpeel-loops -ftracer -finline-functions execution test > nvptx-none-run: gcc.dg/torture/pr52028.c -O3 -g execution test > > Tests that now work, but didn't before: > > nvptx-none-run: gcc.c-torture/execute/20091229-1.c -O3 -g execution test > nvptx-none-run: gcc.c-torture/execute/20101013-1.c -Os execution test > nvptx-none-run: gcc.c-torture/execute/20101025-1.c -Os execution test > nvptx-none-run: gcc.c-torture/execute/20120105-1.c -O0 execution test > nvptx-none-run: gcc.c-torture/execute/20120111-1.c -O0 execution test > > New tests that PASS: > > nvptx-none-run: gcc.target/nvptx/sincos-1.c (test for excess errors) > nvptx-none-run: gcc.target/nvptx/sincos-1.c scan-assembler-times > cos.approx.f32 1 > nvptx-none-run: gcc.target/nvptx/sincos-1.c scan-assembler-times > sin.approx.f32 1 > nvptx-none-run: gcc.target/nvptx/sincos-2.c (test for excess errors) > nvptx-none-run: gcc.target/nvptx/sincos-2.c execution test > > >>> ISTR x87 handles this pass just fine and also can do sin and cos. >>> >>> Richard. >>> >>>> Cesar >>> >>> >