Hi all, I revised my patch according to all your reviews.
Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu.
BRs,
Haochen
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Liu, Hongtao <hongtao....@intel.com>
> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 4:57 PM
> To: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>; Jiang, Haochen
> <haochen.ji...@intel.com>
> Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH] i386: Extend cvtps2pd to memory
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 4:53 PM
> > To: Jiang, Haochen <haochen.ji...@intel.com>
> > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Liu, Hongtao <hongtao....@intel.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Extend cvtps2pd to memory
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 10:45 AM Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 9:41 AM Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 9:24 AM Jiang, Haochen
> <haochen.ji...@intel.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > > From: Uros Bizjak <ubiz...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2022 2:20 PM
> > > > > > To: Jiang, Haochen <haochen.ji...@intel.com>
> > > > > > Cc: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org; Liu, Hongtao
> > > > > > <hongtao....@intel.com>
> > > > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386: Extend cvtps2pd to memory
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 7:59 AM Haochen Jiang
> > > > > > <haochen.ji...@intel.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hi all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This patch aims to fix the cvtps2pd insn, which should also
> > > > > > > work on memory operand but currently does not. After this fix,
> > > > > > > when loop == 2, it will eliminate movq instruction.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu. Ok for trunk?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > BRs,
> > > > > > > Haochen
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > gcc/ChangeLog:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PR target/43618
> > > > > > > * config/i386/sse.md (extendv2sfv2df2): New define_expand.
> > > > > > > (sse2_cvtps2pd_load<mask_name>): Rename
> extendvsdfv2df2.
> > >
> > > Rename FROM ...
> > >
> > > Please also mention change to sse2_cvtps2pd<mask_name>.
> > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > PR target/43618
> > > > > > > * gcc.target/i386/pr43618-1.c: New test.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This patch could be as simple as:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
> > > > > > index 8cd0f617bf3..c331445cb2d 100644
> > > > > > --- a/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
> > > > > > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/sse.md
> > > > > > @@ -9195,7 +9195,7 @@
> > > > > > (define_insn "extendv2sfv2df2"
> > > > > > [(set (match_operand:V2DF 0 "register_operand" "=v")
> > > > > > (float_extend:V2DF
> > > > > > - (match_operand:V2SF 1 "register_operand" "v")))]
> > > > > > + (match_operand:V2SF 1 "nonimmediate_operand" "vm")))]
> > > > > > "TARGET_MMX_WITH_SSE"
> > > > > > "%vcvtps2pd\t{%1, %0|%0, %1}"
> > > > > > [(set_attr "type" "ssecvt")
> > > > >
> > > > > We also tested on this version, it is ok.
> > > > >
> > > > > The reason why the patch looks like this is because in the
> > > > > previous insn sse2_cvtps2pd<mask_name>, the constraint vm and
> > > > > vector_operand actually does not match the actual instruction.
> > > > > Memory operand is V2SF, not V4SF.
> > > > >
> > > > > Therefore, we changed the constraint in that insn. Then it caused
> another
> > issue.
> > > > > For memory operand, it seems that we cannot generate those mask
> > instructions.
> > > > > So I change the pattern to how extendv2hfv2df2 works.
> > > >
> > > > If you want to change the memory access in
> sse2_cvtps2pd<mask_name>,
> > > > then please see how e.g. <insn>v2hiv2di is handled in sse.md. In
> > > > addition to two instructions, you will need one
> > > > define_insn_and_split with a pre-reload splitter.
> > >
> > > Oh, nowadays combine does vec_select from a paradoxical subreg on its
> own.
> > >
> > > +(define_expand "extendv2sfv2df2"
> > > + [(set (match_operand:V2DF 0 "register_operand")
> > > + (float_extend:V2DF
> > > + (match_operand:V2SF 1 "nonimmediate_operand")))]
> > > + "TARGET_MMX_WITH_SSE"
> > > +{
> > > + if (!MEM_P (operands[1]))
> > > + {
> > >
> > > You will need force reg here:
> > >
> > > rtx op1 = force_reg (V2SFmode, operands[1]);
> > > + operands[1] = lowpart_subreg (V4SFmode, op1, V2SFmode);
> > > + emit_insn (gen_sse2_cvtps2pd (operands[0], operands[1]));
> > > + DONE;
> > > + }
> > > +})
> > >
> > >
> > > -(define_insn "extendv2sfv2df2"
> > > +(define_insn "sse2_cvtps2pd_load<mask_name>"
> > >
> > > Please name this insn "*sse2_cvtps2pd<mask_name>_1". Please note
> the
> > > star at the beginning, You don't have to make the name public.
> > >
> > > OK with the above changes.
> >
> > Forgot to mention:
> >
> >
> > - (match_operand:V2SF 1 "register_operand" "v")))]
> > - "TARGET_MMX_WITH_SSE"
> > - "%vcvtps2pd\t{%1, %0|%0, %1}"
> > + (match_operand:V2SF 1 "memory_operand" "m")))]
> > + "TARGET_MMX_WITH_SSE && <mask_avx512vl_condition>"
> > + "%vcvtps2pd\t{%1, %0<mask_operand2>|%0<mask_oper
> > and2>, %q1}"
> > [(set_attr "type" "ssecvt")
> >
> > The new insn does not need to be limited to TARGET_MMX_WITH_SSE, so
> we
> > can use TARGET_SSE2 here.
> >
> > Which opens the question if the expander could also be TARGET_SSE2 only.
> > There are no MMX registers involved in any of the patterns anymore.
> Yes.
> >
> > Uros.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Uros,
0001-i386-Extend-cvtps2pd-to-memory.patch
Description: 0001-i386-Extend-cvtps2pd-to-memory.patch
