On Thu, Oct 19, 2023 at 10:46 PM Richard Sandiford
<richard.sandif...@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Manolis Tsamis <manolis.tsa...@vrull.eu> writes:
> > Currently the operations allowed for if conversion of a basic block with
> > multiple sets are few, namely REG, SUBREG and CONST_INT (as controlled by
> > bb_ok_for_noce_convert_multiple_sets).
> >
> > This commit allows more operations (arithmetic, compare, etc) to participate
> > in if conversion. The target's profitability hook and ifcvt's costing is
> > expected to reject sequences that are unprofitable.
> >
> > This is especially useful for targets which provide a rich selection of
> > conditional instructions (like aarch64 which has cinc, csneg, csinv, ccmp,
> > ...)
> > which are currently not used in basic blocks with more than a single set.
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * ifcvt.cc (try_emit_cmove_seq): Modify comments.
> > (noce_convert_multiple_sets_1): Modify comments.
> > (bb_ok_for_noce_convert_multiple_sets): Allow more operations.
> >
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * gcc.target/aarch64/ifcvt_multiple_sets_arithm.c: New test.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Manolis Tsamis <manolis.tsa...@vrull.eu>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes in v3:
> > - Add SCALAR_INT_MODE_P check in
> > bb_ok_for_noce_convert_multiple_sets.
> > - Allow rewiring of multiple regs.
> > - Refactor code with noce_multiple_sets_info.
> > - Remove old code for subregs.
> >
> > gcc/ifcvt.cc | 63 ++++++++++-----
> > .../aarch64/ifcvt_multiple_sets_arithm.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
> > create mode 100644
> > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/ifcvt_multiple_sets_arithm.c
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/ifcvt.cc b/gcc/ifcvt.cc
> > index 3273aeca125..efe8ab1577a 100644
> > --- a/gcc/ifcvt.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/ifcvt.cc
> > @@ -3215,13 +3215,13 @@ try_emit_cmove_seq (struct noce_if_info *if_info,
> > rtx temp,
> > /* We have something like:
> >
> > if (x > y)
> > - { i = a; j = b; k = c; }
> > + { i = EXPR_A; j = EXPR_B; k = EXPR_C; }
> >
> > Make it:
> >
> > - tmp_i = (x > y) ? a : i;
> > - tmp_j = (x > y) ? b : j;
> > - tmp_k = (x > y) ? c : k;
> > + tmp_i = (x > y) ? EXPR_A : i;
> > + tmp_j = (x > y) ? EXPR_B : j;
> > + tmp_k = (x > y) ? EXPR_C : k;
> > i = tmp_i;
> > j = tmp_j;
> > k = tmp_k;
> > @@ -3637,11 +3637,10 @@ noce_convert_multiple_sets_1 (struct noce_if_info
> > *if_info,
> >
> >
> >
> > -/* Return true iff basic block TEST_BB is comprised of only
> > - (SET (REG) (REG)) insns suitable for conversion to a series
> > - of conditional moves. Also check that we have more than one set
> > - (other routines can handle a single set better than we would), and
> > - fewer than PARAM_MAX_RTL_IF_CONVERSION_INSNS sets. While going
> > +/* Return true iff basic block TEST_BB is suitable for conversion to a
> > + series of conditional moves. Also check that we have more than one
> > + set (other routines can handle a single set better than we would),
> > + and fewer than PARAM_MAX_RTL_IF_CONVERSION_INSNS sets. While going
> > through the insns store the sum of their potential costs in COST. */
> >
> > static bool
> > @@ -3667,20 +3666,46 @@ bb_ok_for_noce_convert_multiple_sets (basic_block
> > test_bb, unsigned *cost)
> > rtx dest = SET_DEST (set);
> > rtx src = SET_SRC (set);
> >
> > - /* We can possibly relax this, but for now only handle REG to REG
> > - (including subreg) moves. This avoids any issues that might come
> > - from introducing loads/stores that might violate data-race-freedom
> > - guarantees. */
> > - if (!REG_P (dest))
> > + /* Do not handle anything involving memory loads/stores since it
> > might
> > + violate data-race-freedom guarantees. */
> > + if (!REG_P (dest) || contains_mem_rtx_p (src))
> > + return false;
> > +
> > + if (!SCALAR_INT_MODE_P (GET_MODE (src)))
> > return false;
> >
> > - if (!((REG_P (src) || CONSTANT_P (src))
> > - || (GET_CODE (src) == SUBREG && REG_P (SUBREG_REG (src))
> > - && subreg_lowpart_p (src))))
> > + /* Allow a wide range of operations and let the costing function
> > decide
> > + if the conversion is worth it later. */
> > + enum rtx_code code = GET_CODE (src);
> > + if (!(CONSTANT_P (src)
> > + || code == REG
> > + || code == SUBREG
> > + || code == ZERO_EXTEND
> > + || code == SIGN_EXTEND
> > + || code == NOT
> > + || code == NEG
> > + || code == PLUS
> > + || code == MINUS
> > + || code == AND
> > + || code == IOR
> > + || code == MULT
> > + || code == ASHIFT
> > + || code == ASHIFTRT
> > + || code == NE
> > + || code == EQ
> > + || code == GE
> > + || code == GT
> > + || code == LE
> > + || code == LT
> > + || code == GEU
> > + || code == GTU
> > + || code == LEU
> > + || code == LTU
> > + || code == COMPARE))
> > return false;
>
> I'm nervous about lists of operations like these, for two reasons:
>
> (1) It isn't obvious what criteria are used to select the codes.
Indeed; I was hoping to find some existing GCC predicate that accepts
'common binary ops' or similar, in order to avoid complicated
situations. But it looks like this is mostly unnecessary.
I'll try removing this list and see if there are any issues.
>
> (2) It requires the top-level code to belong to a given set, but it
> allows subrtxes of src to be arbitrarily complex. E.g. (to pick
> a silly example) a toplevel (popcount ...) would be rejected, but
> (plus (popcount ...) (const_int 1)) would be OK.
>
I have completely missed that, so thanks for mentioning.
> Could we just remove this condition instead?
>
So, yes, will do.
Thanks and sorry for the late reply,
Manolis
> Thanks,
> Richard
>
> >
> > - /* Destination must be appropriate for a conditional write. */
> > - if (!noce_operand_ok (dest))
> > + /* Destination and source must be appropriate. */
> > + if (!noce_operand_ok (dest) || !noce_operand_ok (src))
> > return false;
> >
> > /* We must be able to conditionally move in this mode. */
> > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/ifcvt_multiple_sets_arithm.c
> > b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/ifcvt_multiple_sets_arithm.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 00000000000..d977f4d62ec
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/aarch64/ifcvt_multiple_sets_arithm.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,79 @@
> > +/* { dg-do compile } */
> > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -fdump-rtl-ce1" } */
> > +
> > +void sink2(int, int);
> > +void sink3(int, int, int);
> > +
> > +void cond1(int cond, int x, int y)
> > +{
> > + if (cond)
> > + {
> > + x = x << 4;
> > + y = 1;
> > + }
> > +
> > + sink2(x, y);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void cond2(int cond, int x, int y)
> > +{
> > + if (cond)
> > + {
> > + x++;
> > + y++;
> > + }
> > +
> > + sink2(x, y);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void cond3(int cond, int x1, int x2, int x3)
> > +{
> > + if (cond)
> > + {
> > + x1++;
> > + x2++;
> > + x3++;
> > + }
> > +
> > + sink3(x1, x2, x3);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void cond4(int cond, int x, int y)
> > +{
> > + if (cond)
> > + {
> > + x += 2;
> > + y += 3;
> > + }
> > +
> > + sink2(x, y);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void cond5(int cond, int x, int y, int r1, int r2)
> > +{
> > + if (cond)
> > + {
> > + x = r1 + 2;
> > + y = r2 - 34;
> > + }
> > +
> > + sink2(x, y);
> > +}
> > +
> > +void cond6(int cond, int x, int y)
> > +{
> > + if (cond)
> > + {
> > + x = -x;
> > + y = ~y;
> > + }
> > +
> > + sink2(x, y);
> > +}
> > +
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "cinc\t" 5 } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "csneg\t" 1 } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times "csinv\t" 1 } } */
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "csel\t" } } */
> > +
> > +/* { dg-final { scan-rtl-dump-times "if-conversion succeeded through
> > noce_convert_multiple_sets" 6 "ce1" } } */
> > \ No newline at end of file
