Re: [PATCH] RISC-V: Fix backward_propagate_worthwhile_p
committed, thanks.
On Tue, Jan 3, 2023 at 3:17 PM wrote:
> From: Ju-Zhe Zhong
>
> gcc/ChangeLog:
>
> * config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc (loop_basic_block_p): Adjust
> function.
> (backward_propagate_worthwhile_p): Fix non-worthwhile.
>
> ---
> gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc | 91 +---
> 1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc
> b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc
> index ad0457ed89d..fe76bea297e 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc
> @@ -116,10 +116,27 @@ vlmax_avl_insn_p (rtx_insn *rinsn)
> || INSN_CODE (rinsn) == CODE_FOR_vlmax_avldi);
> }
>
> +/* Return true if the block is a loop itself:
> + local_dem
> +__
> +| |
> + || |
> + || |
> +|_|
> + reaching_out
> +*/
> static bool
> loop_basic_block_p (const basic_block cfg_bb)
> {
> - return JUMP_P (BB_END (cfg_bb)) && any_condjump_p (BB_END (cfg_bb));
> + if (JUMP_P (BB_END (cfg_bb)) && any_condjump_p (BB_END (cfg_bb)))
> +{
> + edge e;
> + edge_iterator ei;
> + FOR_EACH_EDGE (e, ei, cfg_bb->succs)
> + if (e->dest->index == cfg_bb->index)
> + return true;
> +}
> + return false;
> }
>
> /* Return true if it is an RVV instruction depends on VTYPE global
> @@ -271,26 +288,60 @@ backward_propagate_worthwhile_p (const basic_block
> cfg_bb,
> {
>if (loop_basic_block_p (cfg_bb))
> {
> - if (block_info.local_dem.compatible_p (block_info.reaching_out))
> - return true;
> -
> - /* There is a obvious case that is not worthwhile and meaningless
> -to propagate the demand information:
> - local_dem
> -__
> -| |
> - || |
> - || |
> -|_|
> - reaching_out
> - Header is incompatible with reaching_out and the block is loop
> itself,
> - we don't backward propagate the local_dem since we can't avoid
> emit
> - vsetvl for the local_dem. */
> - edge e;
> - edge_iterator ei;
> - FOR_EACH_EDGE (e, ei, cfg_bb->succs)
> - if (e->dest->index == cfg_bb->index)
> + if (block_info.reaching_out.valid_or_dirty_p ())
> + {
> + if (block_info.local_dem.compatible_p (block_info.reaching_out))
> + {
> + /* Case 1 (Can backward propagate):
> +
> +bb0:
> +...
> +for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
> + {
> +vint16mf4_t v = __riscv_vle16_v_i16mf4 (in + i + 5,
> 7);
> +__riscv_vse16_v_i16mf4 (out + i + 5, v, 7);
> + }
> +The local_dem is compatible with reaching_out. Such case
> is
> +worthwhile backward propagation. */
> + return true;
> + }
> + else
> + {
> + /* Case 2 (Don't backward propagate):
> +
> + bb0:
> + ...
> + for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
> + {
> + vint16mf4_t v = __riscv_vle16_v_i16mf4 (in + i +
> 5, 7);
> + __riscv_vse16_v_i16mf4 (out + i + 5, v, 7);
> + vint16mf2_t v2 = __riscv_vle16_v_i16mf2 (in + i +
> 6, 8);
> + __riscv_vse16_v_i16mf2 (out + i + 6, v, 8);
> + }
> +The local_dem is incompatible with reaching_out.
> +It makes no sense to backward propagate the local_dem
> since we
> +can't avoid VSETVL inside the loop. */
> + return false;
> + }
> + }
> + else
> + {
> + gcc_assert (block_info.reaching_out.unknown_p ());
> + /* Case 3 (Don't backward propagate):
> +
> + bb0:
> + ...
> + for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
> + {
> + vint16mf4_t v = __riscv_vle16_v_i16mf4 (in + i + 5, 7);
> + __riscv_vse16_v_i16mf4 (out + i + 5, v, 7);
> + fn3 ();
> + }
> + The local_dem is VALID, but the reaching_out is UNKNOWN.
> + It makes no sense to backward propagate the local_dem since we
> + can't avoid VSETVL inside the loop. */
> return false;
> + }
> }
>
>return true;
> --
> 2.36.3
>
>
[PATCH] RISC-V: Fix backward_propagate_worthwhile_p
From: Ju-Zhe Zhong
gcc/ChangeLog:
* config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc (loop_basic_block_p): Adjust function.
(backward_propagate_worthwhile_p): Fix non-worthwhile.
---
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc | 91 +---
1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc
index ad0457ed89d..fe76bea297e 100644
--- a/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vsetvl.cc
@@ -116,10 +116,27 @@ vlmax_avl_insn_p (rtx_insn *rinsn)
|| INSN_CODE (rinsn) == CODE_FOR_vlmax_avldi);
}
+/* Return true if the block is a loop itself:
+ local_dem
+__
+| |
+ || |
+ || |
+|_|
+ reaching_out
+*/
static bool
loop_basic_block_p (const basic_block cfg_bb)
{
- return JUMP_P (BB_END (cfg_bb)) && any_condjump_p (BB_END (cfg_bb));
+ if (JUMP_P (BB_END (cfg_bb)) && any_condjump_p (BB_END (cfg_bb)))
+{
+ edge e;
+ edge_iterator ei;
+ FOR_EACH_EDGE (e, ei, cfg_bb->succs)
+ if (e->dest->index == cfg_bb->index)
+ return true;
+}
+ return false;
}
/* Return true if it is an RVV instruction depends on VTYPE global
@@ -271,26 +288,60 @@ backward_propagate_worthwhile_p (const basic_block cfg_bb,
{
if (loop_basic_block_p (cfg_bb))
{
- if (block_info.local_dem.compatible_p (block_info.reaching_out))
- return true;
-
- /* There is a obvious case that is not worthwhile and meaningless
-to propagate the demand information:
- local_dem
-__
-| |
- || |
- || |
-|_|
- reaching_out
- Header is incompatible with reaching_out and the block is loop itself,
- we don't backward propagate the local_dem since we can't avoid emit
- vsetvl for the local_dem. */
- edge e;
- edge_iterator ei;
- FOR_EACH_EDGE (e, ei, cfg_bb->succs)
- if (e->dest->index == cfg_bb->index)
+ if (block_info.reaching_out.valid_or_dirty_p ())
+ {
+ if (block_info.local_dem.compatible_p (block_info.reaching_out))
+ {
+ /* Case 1 (Can backward propagate):
+
+bb0:
+...
+for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
+ {
+vint16mf4_t v = __riscv_vle16_v_i16mf4 (in + i + 5, 7);
+__riscv_vse16_v_i16mf4 (out + i + 5, v, 7);
+ }
+The local_dem is compatible with reaching_out. Such case is
+worthwhile backward propagation. */
+ return true;
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ /* Case 2 (Don't backward propagate):
+
+ bb0:
+ ...
+ for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
+ {
+ vint16mf4_t v = __riscv_vle16_v_i16mf4 (in + i + 5, 7);
+ __riscv_vse16_v_i16mf4 (out + i + 5, v, 7);
+ vint16mf2_t v2 = __riscv_vle16_v_i16mf2 (in + i + 6, 8);
+ __riscv_vse16_v_i16mf2 (out + i + 6, v, 8);
+ }
+The local_dem is incompatible with reaching_out.
+It makes no sense to backward propagate the local_dem since we
+can't avoid VSETVL inside the loop. */
+ return false;
+ }
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ gcc_assert (block_info.reaching_out.unknown_p ());
+ /* Case 3 (Don't backward propagate):
+
+ bb0:
+ ...
+ for (int i = 0; i < n; i++)
+ {
+ vint16mf4_t v = __riscv_vle16_v_i16mf4 (in + i + 5, 7);
+ __riscv_vse16_v_i16mf4 (out + i + 5, v, 7);
+ fn3 ();
+ }
+ The local_dem is VALID, but the reaching_out is UNKNOWN.
+ It makes no sense to backward propagate the local_dem since we
+ can't avoid VSETVL inside the loop. */
return false;
+ }
}
return true;
--
2.36.3
