subject:"\[PATCH V4\] VECT\: Support loop len control on EXTRACT

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-15 Thread Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches

Richard Biener  writes:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, Richard Sandiford wrote:
>
>> Richard Biener  writes:
>> > On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Stefan,
>> >> 
>> >> on 2023/8/15 02:51, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
>> >> > Hi everyone,
>> >> > 
>> >> > I have bootstrapped and regtested the patch below on s390.  For the
>> >> > 64-bit target I do not see any changes regarding the testsuite.  For the
>> >> > 31-bit target I see the following failures:
>> >> > 
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (internal compiler error: in 
>> >> > require, at machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (test for excess errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> >> > machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (test for excess errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> >> > errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> >> > machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (test for excess errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> >> > errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> >> > machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (test for excess errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> >> > errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> >> > machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (test for excess errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal 
>> >> > compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> >> > errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> >> > machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (test for excess errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> >> > errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> >> > machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (test for excess errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> >> > errors)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects 
>> >> > (internal compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test 
>> >> > for excess errors)
>> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c compilation failed to 
>> >> > produce executable
>> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects  
>> >> > scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
>> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 
>> >> > 10" 2
>> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects compilation 
>> >> > failed to produce executable
>> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c compilation failed to produce 
>> >> > executable
>> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects 
>> >> > compilation failed to produce executable
>> >> > 
>> >> > I've randomely picked pr50451.c and ran gcc against it which results in:
>> >> > 
>> >> > during GIMPLE pass: vect
>> >> > dump file: pr50451.c.174t.vect
>> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c: In 
>> >> > function ?foo?:
>> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c:5:1:
>> >> >  internal compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313
>> >> > 0x1265d21 opt_mode::require() const
>> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/machmode.h:313
>> >> > 0x1d7e4e9 opt_mode::require() const
>> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/vec.h:955
>> >> > 0x1d7e4e9 vect_verify_loop_lens
>> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:1471
>> >> > 0x1da29ab vect_analyze_loop_2
>> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:2929
>> >> > 0x1da40c7 vect_analyze_loop_1
>> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3330
>> >> > 0x1da499d vect_analyze_loop(loop*, vec_info_shared*)
>> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3484
>> >> >

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-15 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches

On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, Richard Sandiford wrote:

> Richard Biener  writes:
> > On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, Kewen.Lin wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Stefan,
> >> 
> >> on 2023/8/15 02:51, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
> >> > Hi everyone,
> >> > 
> >> > I have bootstrapped and regtested the patch below on s390.  For the
> >> > 64-bit target I do not see any changes regarding the testsuite.  For the
> >> > 31-bit target I see the following failures:
> >> > 
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (internal compiler error: in 
> >> > require, at machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (test for excess errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> >> > machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (test for excess errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
> >> > errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> >> > machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (test for excess errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
> >> > errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> >> > machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (test for excess errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
> >> > errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> >> > machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (test for excess errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
> >> > errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> >> > machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (test for excess errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
> >> > errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> >> > machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (test for excess errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> >> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
> >> > errors)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects 
> >> > (internal compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> >> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test 
> >> > for excess errors)
> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c compilation failed to 
> >> > produce executable
> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects  
> >> > scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 
> >> > 10" 2
> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects compilation 
> >> > failed to produce executable
> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c compilation failed to produce 
> >> > executable
> >> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects 
> >> > compilation failed to produce executable
> >> > 
> >> > I've randomely picked pr50451.c and ran gcc against it which results in:
> >> > 
> >> > during GIMPLE pass: vect
> >> > dump file: pr50451.c.174t.vect
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c: In 
> >> > function ?foo?:
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c:5:1: 
> >> > internal compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313
> >> > 0x1265d21 opt_mode::require() const
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/machmode.h:313
> >> > 0x1d7e4e9 opt_mode::require() const
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/vec.h:955
> >> > 0x1d7e4e9 vect_verify_loop_lens
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:1471
> >> > 0x1da29ab vect_analyze_loop_2
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:2929
> >> > 0x1da40c7 vect_analyze_loop_1
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3330
> >> > 0x1da499d vect_analyze_loop(loop*, vec_info_shared*)
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3484
> >> > 0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop_1
> >> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1064
> >> > 0x1deed2

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-15 Thread Richard Sandiford via Gcc-patches

Richard Biener  writes:
> On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, Kewen.Lin wrote:
>
>> Hi Stefan,
>> 
>> on 2023/8/15 02:51, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
>> > Hi everyone,
>> > 
>> > I have bootstrapped and regtested the patch below on s390.  For the
>> > 64-bit target I do not see any changes regarding the testsuite.  For the
>> > 31-bit target I see the following failures:
>> > 
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (internal compiler error: in 
>> > require, at machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> > machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> > errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> > machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> > errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> > machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> > errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> > machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> > errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> > machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> > errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
>> > machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (test for excess errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
>> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
>> > errors)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal 
>> > compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
>> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for 
>> > excess errors)
>> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c compilation failed to 
>> > produce executable
>> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects  
>> > scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
>> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
>> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects compilation 
>> > failed to produce executable
>> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c compilation failed to produce 
>> > executable
>> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects 
>> > compilation failed to produce executable
>> > 
>> > I've randomely picked pr50451.c and ran gcc against it which results in:
>> > 
>> > during GIMPLE pass: vect
>> > dump file: pr50451.c.174t.vect
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c: In 
>> > function ?foo?:
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c:5:1: 
>> > internal compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313
>> > 0x1265d21 opt_mode::require() const
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/machmode.h:313
>> > 0x1d7e4e9 opt_mode::require() const
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/vec.h:955
>> > 0x1d7e4e9 vect_verify_loop_lens
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:1471
>> > 0x1da29ab vect_analyze_loop_2
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:2929
>> > 0x1da40c7 vect_analyze_loop_1
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3330
>> > 0x1da499d vect_analyze_loop(loop*, vec_info_shared*)
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3484
>> > 0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop_1
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1064
>> > 0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1180
>> > 0x1def5c1 execute
>> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1296
>> > Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed s

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches

On Tue, 15 Aug 2023, Kewen.Lin wrote:

> Hi Stefan,
> 
> on 2023/8/15 02:51, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> > 
> > I have bootstrapped and regtested the patch below on s390.  For the
> > 64-bit target I do not see any changes regarding the testsuite.  For the
> > 31-bit target I see the following failures:
> > 
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (internal compiler error: in 
> > require, at machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> > machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> > machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> > machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> > machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess 
> > errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> > machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> > machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> > error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal 
> > compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> > FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for 
> > excess errors)
> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c compilation failed to produce 
> > executable
> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects  
> > scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects compilation 
> > failed to produce executable
> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c compilation failed to produce executable
> > UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects 
> > compilation failed to produce executable
> > 
> > I've randomely picked pr50451.c and ran gcc against it which results in:
> > 
> > during GIMPLE pass: vect
> > dump file: pr50451.c.174t.vect
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c: In 
> > function ?foo?:
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c:5:1: 
> > internal compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313
> > 0x1265d21 opt_mode::require() const
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/machmode.h:313
> > 0x1d7e4e9 opt_mode::require() const
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/vec.h:955
> > 0x1d7e4e9 vect_verify_loop_lens
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:1471
> > 0x1da29ab vect_analyze_loop_2
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:2929
> > 0x1da40c7 vect_analyze_loop_1
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3330
> > 0x1da499d vect_analyze_loop(loop*, vec_info_shared*)
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3484
> > 0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop_1
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1064
> > 0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1180
> > 0x1def5c1 execute
> > /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1296
> > Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source (by using 
> > -freport-bug).
> > Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
> > See  for instructions.
>

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches

Hi Stefan,

on 2023/8/15 02:51, Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I have bootstrapped and regtested the patch below on s390.  For the
> 64-bit target I do not see any changes regarding the testsuite.  For the
> 31-bit target I see the following failures:
> 
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (internal compiler error: in require, 
> at machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
> in require, at machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
> in require, at machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
> in require, at machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler 
> error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
> in require, at machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
> machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
> in require, at machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal 
> compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
> FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for 
> excess errors)
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c compilation failed to produce 
> executable
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects  
> scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects compilation 
> failed to produce executable
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c compilation failed to produce executable
> UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects 
> compilation failed to produce executable
> 
> I've randomely picked pr50451.c and ran gcc against it which results in:
> 
> during GIMPLE pass: vect
> dump file: pr50451.c.174t.vect
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c: In 
> function ‘foo’:
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c:5:1: 
> internal compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313
> 0x1265d21 opt_mode::require() const
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/machmode.h:313
> 0x1d7e4e9 opt_mode::require() const
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/vec.h:955
> 0x1d7e4e9 vect_verify_loop_lens
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:1471
> 0x1da29ab vect_analyze_loop_2
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:2929
> 0x1da40c7 vect_analyze_loop_1
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3330
> 0x1da499d vect_analyze_loop(loop*, vec_info_shared*)
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3484
> 0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop_1
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1064
> 0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1180
> 0x1def5c1 execute
> /gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1296
> Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source (by using 
> -freport-bug).
> Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
> See  for instructions.
> 

It looks like s390 supports variable index vec_extract at -m31 but
no vector with length.  It seems we need to further check the vector
with length capability, with something like:

diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Stefan Schulze Frielinghaus via Gcc-patches

Hi everyone,

I have bootstrapped and regtested the patch below on s390.  For the
64-bit target I do not see any changes regarding the testsuite.  For the
31-bit target I see the following failures:

FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (internal compiler error: in require, 
at machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
in require, at machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
in require, at machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
in require, at machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71407.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
in require, at machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
in require, at machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr94443.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (internal compiler error: in require, at 
machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal compiler error: 
in require, at machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/pr97558.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for excess errors)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (internal 
compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313)
FAIL: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects (test for 
excess errors)
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/no-scevccp-outer-14.c compilation failed to produce 
executable
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects  scan-tree-dump-times 
optimized "\\* 10" 2
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr53773.c scan-tree-dump-times optimized "\\* 10" 2
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects compilation failed 
to produce executable
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/pr71416-1.c compilation failed to produce executable
UNRESOLVED: gcc.dg/vect/vect-reduc-pattern-3.c -flto -ffat-lto-objects 
compilation failed to produce executable

I've randomely picked pr50451.c and ran gcc against it which results in:

during GIMPLE pass: vect
dump file: pr50451.c.174t.vect
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c: In 
function ‘foo’:
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/testsuite/gcc.dg/vect/pr50451.c:5:1: 
internal compiler error: in require, at machmode.h:313
0x1265d21 opt_mode::require() const
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/machmode.h:313
0x1d7e4e9 opt_mode::require() const
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/vec.h:955
0x1d7e4e9 vect_verify_loop_lens
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:1471
0x1da29ab vect_analyze_loop_2
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:2929
0x1da40c7 vect_analyze_loop_1
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3330
0x1da499d vect_analyze_loop(loop*, vec_info_shared*)
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc:3484
0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop_1
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1064
0x1deed27 try_vectorize_loop
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1180
0x1def5c1 execute
/gcc-verify-workdir/patched/src/gcc/tree-vectorizer.cc:1296
Please submit a full bug report, with preprocessed source (by using 
-freport-bug).
Please include the complete backtrace with any bug report.
See  for instructions.

I will come back to this tomorrow.

Cheers,
Stefan

On Mon, Aug 14, 2023 at 08:45:21PM +0800, Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches wrote:
> Hi Juzhe,
> 
> on 2023/8/14 20:08, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> > Hi, Kewin.
> > 
> > Could you test 'can_vec_extract_var_idx_p' and send V5 patch when you pass 
> > the testing?
> 
> The below diff was bootstrapped and regress-tested on Power10 LE.  Comparing 
> to the
> previous v4, the only changes should be the proposed 
> can_vec_extract_va

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023, ??? wrote:

> Thanks Kewen.
> 
> But I saw there is 2 more files include:
> 
> +#include "memmodel.h"
> +#include "optabs.h"
> 
> Not sure whether Richard and Richi ok with that change ?

Yes, please just apply some common sense.

> Thanks.
> 
> 
> 
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>  
> From: Kewen.Lin
> Date: 2023-08-14 20:45
> To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> CC: Robin Dapp; richard.sandiford; rguenther; GCC Patches
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST 
> vectorization
> Hi Juzhe,
>  
> on 2023/8/14 20:08, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> > Hi, Kewin.
> > 
> > Could you test 'can_vec_extract_var_idx_p' and send V5 patch when you pass 
> > the testing?
>  
> The below diff was bootstrapped and regress-tested on Power10 LE.  Comparing 
> to the
> previous v4, the only changes should be the proposed 
> can_vec_extract_var_idx_p and
> its required new includes as below:
>  
> +#include "memmodel.h"
> +#include "optabs.h"
> Could you have a double check?
>  
> Since I just tested it on Power10, you have the full ownership on the patch, 
> I'd leave
> the v5 posting to you.  Thanks!
>  
> BR,
> Kewen
> -
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> index bc3063c3615..5ae9f69c7eb 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> @@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.  If not see
> #include "tree-pass.h"
> #include "ssa.h"
> #include "optabs-tree.h"
> +#include "memmodel.h"
> +#include "optabs.h"
> #include "diagnostic-core.h"
> #include "fold-const.h"
> #include "stor-layout.h"
> @@ -10300,17 +10302,7 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
>/* No transformation required.  */
>if (loop_vinfo && LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo))
> {
> -   if (!direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
> -OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
> - {
> -   if (dump_enabled_p ())
> - dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> - "can't operate on partial vectors "
> - "because the target doesn't support extract "
> - "last reduction.\n");
> -   LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
> - }
> -   else if (slp_node)
> +   if (slp_node)
> {
>   if (dump_enabled_p ())
> dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> @@ -10330,9 +10322,26 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
>   else
> {
>   gcc_assert (ncopies == 1 && !slp_node);
> -   vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
> -  &LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
> -  1, vectype, NULL);
> +   if (direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
> +   OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
> + vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
> +&LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
> +1, vectype, NULL);
> +   else if (can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
> + TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype
> + vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
> +   &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
> +   1, vectype, 1);
> +   else
> + {
> +   if (dump_enabled_p ())
> + dump_printf_loc (
> +   MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> +   "can't operate on partial vectors "
> +   "because the target doesn't support extract "
> +   "last reduction.\n");
> +   LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
> + }
> }
> }
>/* ???  Enable for loop costing as well.  */
> @@ -10358,7 +10367,9 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
>gimple *vec_stmt;
>if (slp_node)
>  {
> -  gcc_assert (!loop_vinfo || !LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo));
> +  gcc_assert (!loop_vinfo
> +   || (!LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo)
> +   && !LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_WITH_LENGTH_P (loop_vinfo)));
>  
>/* Get the correct slp vectorized stmt.  */
>vec_lhs = SLP_TREE_VEC_DEFS (slp_node)[vec_entry];
> @@ -10402,7 +10413,42 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
>  
>gimple_seq stmts = NULL;
>tree new_tree;
> -  if (LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo))
> +  if (LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_WITH_LENGTH_P (loop_vinfo))
> + {
> +   /* Emit:
> +
> +SCALAR_RES = VEC_EXTRACT 
> +
> +  where VEC_LHS is the vector

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread 钟居哲

Thanks Kewen.

But I saw there is 2 more files include:

+#include "memmodel.h"
+#include "optabs.h"

Not sure whether Richard and Richi ok with that change ?

Thanks.



juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
 
From: Kewen.Lin
Date: 2023-08-14 20:45
To: juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
CC: Robin Dapp; richard.sandiford; rguenther; GCC Patches
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST 
vectorization
Hi Juzhe,
 
on 2023/8/14 20:08, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> Hi, Kewin.
> 
> Could you test 'can_vec_extract_var_idx_p' and send V5 patch when you pass 
> the testing?
 
The below diff was bootstrapped and regress-tested on Power10 LE.  Comparing to 
the
previous v4, the only changes should be the proposed can_vec_extract_var_idx_p 
and
its required new includes as below:
 
+#include "memmodel.h"
+#include "optabs.h"
Could you have a double check?
 
Since I just tested it on Power10, you have the full ownership on the patch, 
I'd leave
the v5 posting to you.  Thanks!
 
BR,
Kewen
-
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index bc3063c3615..5ae9f69c7eb 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
@@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.  If not see
#include "tree-pass.h"
#include "ssa.h"
#include "optabs-tree.h"
+#include "memmodel.h"
+#include "optabs.h"
#include "diagnostic-core.h"
#include "fold-const.h"
#include "stor-layout.h"
@@ -10300,17 +10302,7 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
   /* No transformation required.  */
   if (loop_vinfo && LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo))
{
-   if (!direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
-OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
- {
-   if (dump_enabled_p ())
- dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
- "can't operate on partial vectors "
- "because the target doesn't support extract "
- "last reduction.\n");
-   LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
- }
-   else if (slp_node)
+   if (slp_node)
{
  if (dump_enabled_p ())
dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
@@ -10330,9 +10322,26 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
  else
{
  gcc_assert (ncopies == 1 && !slp_node);
-   vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
-  &LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
-  1, vectype, NULL);
+   if (direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
+   OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
+ vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
+&LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
+1, vectype, NULL);
+   else if (can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
+ TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype
+ vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
+   &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
+   1, vectype, 1);
+   else
+ {
+   if (dump_enabled_p ())
+ dump_printf_loc (
+   MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
+   "can't operate on partial vectors "
+   "because the target doesn't support extract "
+   "last reduction.\n");
+   LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
+ }
}
}
   /* ???  Enable for loop costing as well.  */
@@ -10358,7 +10367,9 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
   gimple *vec_stmt;
   if (slp_node)
 {
-  gcc_assert (!loop_vinfo || !LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo));
+  gcc_assert (!loop_vinfo
+   || (!LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo)
+   && !LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_WITH_LENGTH_P (loop_vinfo)));
 
   /* Get the correct slp vectorized stmt.  */
   vec_lhs = SLP_TREE_VEC_DEFS (slp_node)[vec_entry];
@@ -10402,7 +10413,42 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
 
   gimple_seq stmts = NULL;
   tree new_tree;
-  if (LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo))
+  if (LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_WITH_LENGTH_P (loop_vinfo))
+ {
+   /* Emit:
+
+SCALAR_RES = VEC_EXTRACT 
+
+  where VEC_LHS is the vectorized live-out result and MASK is
+  the loop mask for the final iteration.  */
+   gcc_assert (ncopies == 1 && !slp_node);
+   gimple_seq tem = NULL;
+   gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_last (tem);
+   tree len
+ = vect_get_loop_len (loop_vinfo, &gsi,
+ &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
+ 1, vectype, 0, 0);
+
+   /* BIAS - 1.  */
+   signed char biasval = LOOP_VINFO_PARTIAL_LOAD_STORE_BIAS (loop_vinfo);
+   tree bias_minus_one
+ = int_const_binop (MINUS_EXPR,
+build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (len), biasval),
+build_one_cst (TREE_TYPE (len)));
+
+   /* LAST_INDEX = LEN + (BIAS - 1).  */
+   tree last_index = gimple_build (&stmts, PLUS_EXPR, TREE_TYPE (len),
+   len, bias_minus_one);
+
+

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches

Hi Juzhe,

on 2023/8/14 20:08, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
> Hi, Kewin.
> 
> Could you test 'can_vec_extract_var_idx_p' and send V5 patch when you pass 
> the testing?

The below diff was bootstrapped and regress-tested on Power10 LE.  Comparing to 
the
previous v4, the only changes should be the proposed can_vec_extract_var_idx_p 
and
its required new includes as below:

+#include "memmodel.h"
+#include "optabs.h"
 
Could you have a double check?

Since I just tested it on Power10, you have the full ownership on the patch, 
I'd leave
the v5 posting to you.  Thanks!

BR,
Kewen
-
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index bc3063c3615..5ae9f69c7eb 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
@@ -32,6 +32,8 @@ along with GCC; see the file COPYING3.  If not see
 #include "tree-pass.h"
 #include "ssa.h"
 #include "optabs-tree.h"
+#include "memmodel.h"
+#include "optabs.h"
 #include "diagnostic-core.h"
 #include "fold-const.h"
 #include "stor-layout.h"
@@ -10300,17 +10302,7 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
   /* No transformation required.  */
   if (loop_vinfo && LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo))
{
- if (!direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
-  OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
-   {
- if (dump_enabled_p ())
-   dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
-"can't operate on partial vectors "
-"because the target doesn't support extract "
-"last reduction.\n");
- LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
-   }
- else if (slp_node)
+ if (slp_node)
{
  if (dump_enabled_p ())
dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
@@ -10330,9 +10322,26 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
  else
{
  gcc_assert (ncopies == 1 && !slp_node);
- vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
-&LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
-1, vectype, NULL);
+ if (direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
+ OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
+   vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
+  &LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
+  1, vectype, NULL);
+ else if (can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
+TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype
+   vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
+ &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
+ 1, vectype, 1);
+ else
+   {
+ if (dump_enabled_p ())
+   dump_printf_loc (
+ MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
+ "can't operate on partial vectors "
+ "because the target doesn't support extract "
+ "last reduction.\n");
+ LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
+   }
}
}
   /* ???  Enable for loop costing as well.  */
@@ -10358,7 +10367,9 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
   gimple *vec_stmt;
   if (slp_node)
 {
-  gcc_assert (!loop_vinfo || !LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo));
+  gcc_assert (!loop_vinfo
+ || (!LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo)
+ && !LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_WITH_LENGTH_P (loop_vinfo)));

   /* Get the correct slp vectorized stmt.  */
   vec_lhs = SLP_TREE_VEC_DEFS (slp_node)[vec_entry];
@@ -10402,7 +10413,42 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,

   gimple_seq stmts = NULL;
   tree new_tree;
-  if (LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_MASKED_P (loop_vinfo))
+  if (LOOP_VINFO_FULLY_WITH_LENGTH_P (loop_vinfo))
+   {
+ /* Emit:
+
+  SCALAR_RES = VEC_EXTRACT 
+
+where VEC_LHS is the vectorized live-out result and MASK is
+the loop mask for the final iteration.  */
+ gcc_assert (ncopies == 1 && !slp_node);
+ gimple_seq tem = NULL;
+ gimple_stmt_iterator gsi = gsi_last (tem);
+ tree len
+   = vect_get_loop_len (loop_vinfo, &gsi,
+&LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
+1, vectype, 0, 0);
+
+ /* BIAS - 1.  */
+ signed char biasval = LOOP_VINFO_PARTIAL_LOAD_STORE_BIAS (loop_vinfo);
+ tree bias_minus_one
+   = int_const_binop (MINUS_EXPR,
+  build_int_cst (TREE_TYPE (len), biasval)

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai

Hi, Kewin.

Could you test 'can_vec_extract_var_idx_p' and send V5 patch when you pass the 
testing?

Thanks.


juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
 
From: Kewen.Lin
Date: 2023-08-14 17:19
To: Robin Dapp
CC: gcc-patches; richard.sandiford; rguenther; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST 
vectorization
Hi Robin,
 
on 2023/8/14 16:58, Robin Dapp wrote:
> Hi Kewen,
> 
>> I did a bootstrapping and regression testing on Power10 (LE) and found a lot 
>> of failures.
> 
> I think the problem is that just like for vec_set we're expecting
> the vec_extract expander not to fail.  It is probably passed not a
> const int here anymore and therefore fails to expand?
 
Thanks for the comments!  Yeah, I think the expectation doesn't hold
on Power, as our vec_extract optab only support const index, that
is:
 
(define_expand "vec_extract"
  [(match_operand: 0 "register_operand")
   (match_operand:VEC_E 1 "vlogical_operand")
   (match_operand 2 "const_int_operand")]
  "VECTOR_MEM_ALTIVEC_OR_VSX_P (mode)"
{
  rs6000_expand_vector_extract (operands[0], operands[1], operands[2]);
  DONE;
})
 
> 
> can_vec_extract_var_idx_p is supposed to check if the backend
> supports extracting a variable index.
 
OK, it sounds that this new capability needs to further check with
function can_vec_extract_var_idx_p to ensure the ifn expanding work
as expected.  I re-spined by adding the below as your comments:
 
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index 07f3717ed9d..80ba5cae84a 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
@@ -10328,7 +10328,9 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
   else if (convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,
   TYPE_MODE (vectype),
   TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype)))
-   != CODE_FOR_nothing)
+ != CODE_FOR_nothing
+   && can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
+ TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype
 vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
   &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
   1, vectype, 1);
 
BR,
Kewen

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:

> -   != CODE_FOR_nothing)
> + != CODE_FOR_nothing
> +   && can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
> + TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE 
> (vectype
> 
> I think maybe 'can_vec_extract_var_idx_p' check is enough and remove 
> convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,... check.
> Looking forward Richi's more comments.

Yes, I think can_vec_extract_var_idx_p already does that so no need to
duplicate it here.

Richard.

> Thanks.
> 
> 
> juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
>  
> From: Kewen.Lin
> Date: 2023-08-14 17:19
> To: Robin Dapp
> CC: gcc-patches; richard.sandiford; rguenther; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
> Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST 
> vectorization
> Hi Robin,
>  
> on 2023/8/14 16:58, Robin Dapp wrote:
> > Hi Kewen,
> > 
> >> I did a bootstrapping and regression testing on Power10 (LE) and found a 
> >> lot of failures.
> > 
> > I think the problem is that just like for vec_set we're expecting
> > the vec_extract expander not to fail.  It is probably passed not a
> > const int here anymore and therefore fails to expand?
>  
> Thanks for the comments!  Yeah, I think the expectation doesn't hold
> on Power, as our vec_extract optab only support const index, that
> is:
>  
> (define_expand "vec_extract"
>   [(match_operand: 0 "register_operand")
>(match_operand:VEC_E 1 "vlogical_operand")
>(match_operand 2 "const_int_operand")]
>   "VECTOR_MEM_ALTIVEC_OR_VSX_P (mode)"
> {
>   rs6000_expand_vector_extract (operands[0], operands[1], operands[2]);
>   DONE;
> })
>  
> > 
> > can_vec_extract_var_idx_p is supposed to check if the backend
> > supports extracting a variable index.
>  
> OK, it sounds that this new capability needs to further check with
> function can_vec_extract_var_idx_p to ensure the ifn expanding work
> as expected.  I re-spined by adding the below as your comments:
>  
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> index 07f3717ed9d..80ba5cae84a 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> @@ -10328,7 +10328,9 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
>else if (convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,
>TYPE_MODE (vectype),
>TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE 
> (vectype)))
> -   != CODE_FOR_nothing)
> + != CODE_FOR_nothing
> +   && can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
> + TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE 
> (vectype
>  vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
>&LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
>1, vectype, 1);
>  
> BR,
> Kewen
>  
> 

-- 
Richard Biener 
SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH,
Frankenstrasse 146, 90461 Nuernberg, Germany;
GF: Ivo Totev, Andrew McDonald, Werner Knoblich; (HRB 36809, AG Nuernberg)

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai

-   != CODE_FOR_nothing)
+ != CODE_FOR_nothing
+   && can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
+ TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype

I think maybe 'can_vec_extract_var_idx_p' check is enough and remove 
convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,... check.
Looking forward Richi's more comments.

Thanks.


juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
 
From: Kewen.Lin
Date: 2023-08-14 17:19
To: Robin Dapp
CC: gcc-patches; richard.sandiford; rguenther; juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST 
vectorization
Hi Robin,
 
on 2023/8/14 16:58, Robin Dapp wrote:
> Hi Kewen,
> 
>> I did a bootstrapping and regression testing on Power10 (LE) and found a lot 
>> of failures.
> 
> I think the problem is that just like for vec_set we're expecting
> the vec_extract expander not to fail.  It is probably passed not a
> const int here anymore and therefore fails to expand?
 
Thanks for the comments!  Yeah, I think the expectation doesn't hold
on Power, as our vec_extract optab only support const index, that
is:
 
(define_expand "vec_extract"
  [(match_operand: 0 "register_operand")
   (match_operand:VEC_E 1 "vlogical_operand")
   (match_operand 2 "const_int_operand")]
  "VECTOR_MEM_ALTIVEC_OR_VSX_P (mode)"
{
  rs6000_expand_vector_extract (operands[0], operands[1], operands[2]);
  DONE;
})
 
> 
> can_vec_extract_var_idx_p is supposed to check if the backend
> supports extracting a variable index.
 
OK, it sounds that this new capability needs to further check with
function can_vec_extract_var_idx_p to ensure the ifn expanding work
as expected.  I re-spined by adding the below as your comments:
 
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index 07f3717ed9d..80ba5cae84a 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
@@ -10328,7 +10328,9 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
   else if (convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,
   TYPE_MODE (vectype),
   TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype)))
-   != CODE_FOR_nothing)
+ != CODE_FOR_nothing
+   && can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
+ TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype
 vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
   &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
   1, vectype, 1);
 
BR,
Kewen

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches

Hi Robin,

on 2023/8/14 16:58, Robin Dapp wrote:
> Hi Kewen,
> 
>> I did a bootstrapping and regression testing on Power10 (LE) and found a lot 
>> of failures.
> 
> I think the problem is that just like for vec_set we're expecting
> the vec_extract expander not to fail.  It is probably passed not a
> const int here anymore and therefore fails to expand?

Thanks for the comments!  Yeah, I think the expectation doesn't hold
on Power, as our vec_extract optab only support const index, that
is:

(define_expand "vec_extract"
  [(match_operand: 0 "register_operand")
   (match_operand:VEC_E 1 "vlogical_operand")
   (match_operand 2 "const_int_operand")]
  "VECTOR_MEM_ALTIVEC_OR_VSX_P (mode)"
{
  rs6000_expand_vector_extract (operands[0], operands[1], operands[2]);
  DONE;
})

> 
> can_vec_extract_var_idx_p is supposed to check if the backend
> supports extracting a variable index.

OK, it sounds that this new capability needs to further check with
function can_vec_extract_var_idx_p to ensure the ifn expanding work
as expected.  I re-spined by adding the below as your comments:

diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index 07f3717ed9d..80ba5cae84a 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
@@ -10328,7 +10328,9 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
   else if (convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,
   TYPE_MODE (vectype),
   TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype)))
-   != CODE_FOR_nothing)
+ != CODE_FOR_nothing
+   && can_vec_extract_var_idx_p (
+ TYPE_MODE (vectype), TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype
 vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
   &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
   1, vectype, 1);

BR,
Kewen

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches

On Mon, 14 Aug 2023, Robin Dapp wrote:

> Hi Kewen,
> 
> > I did a bootstrapping and regression testing on Power10 (LE) and found a 
> > lot of failures.
> 
> I think the problem is that just like for vec_set we're expecting
> the vec_extract expander not to fail.  It is probably passed not a
> const int here anymore and therefore fails to expand?
> 
> can_vec_extract_var_idx_p is supposed to check if the backend
> supports extracting a variable index.

expansion does

  enum insn_code icode = convert_optab_handler (optab, outermode,
extract_mode);

  if (icode != CODE_FOR_nothing)
{
  create_output_operand (&ops[0], target, extract_mode);
  create_input_operand (&ops[1], src, outermode);
  create_convert_operand_from (&ops[2], pos,
   TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (op1)), true);
  if (maybe_expand_insn (icode, 3, ops))
{
  if (!rtx_equal_p (target, ops[0].value))
emit_move_insn (target, ops[0].value);
  return;
}

<--- here

}
  gcc_unreachable ();

so if maybe_expand_insn fails that would need to be sth we need
to cover in the predicate to check.  But that looks possibly
target dependent?  What does actually fail here?

Richard.

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Robin Dapp via Gcc-patches

Hi Kewen,

> I did a bootstrapping and regression testing on Power10 (LE) and found a lot 
> of failures.

I think the problem is that just like for vec_set we're expecting
the vec_extract expander not to fail.  It is probably passed not a
const int here anymore and therefore fails to expand?

can_vec_extract_var_idx_p is supposed to check if the backend
supports extracting a variable index.

Regards
 Robin

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread Kewen.Lin via Gcc-patches

.ai>
> *CC:* gcc-patches <mailto:gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>; richard.sandiford 
> <mailto:richard.sandif...@arm.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST 
> vectorization
> On Fri, 11 Aug 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
>  
> > From: Ju-Zhe Zhong 
> >
> > Hi, Richard and Richi.
> >
> > This patch add support live vectorization by VEC_EXTRACT for LEN loop 
> control.
>  
> OK.
>  
> Thanks,
> Richard.
>  
> > Consider this following case:
> >
> > #include 
> >
> > #define EXTRACT_LAST(TYPE) \
> >   TYPE __attribute__ ((noinline, noclone)) \
> >   test_##TYPE (TYPE *x, int n, TYPE value) \
> >   { \
> > TYPE last; \
> > for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j) \
> >   { \
> > last = x[j]; \
> > x[j] = last * value; \
> >   } \
> > return last; \
> >   }
> >
> > #define TEST_ALL(T) \
> >   T (uint8_t) \
> >
> > TEST_ALL (EXTRACT_LAST)
> >
> > ARM SVE IR:
> >
> > Preheader:
> >   max_mask_34 = .WHILE_ULT (0, bnd.5_6, { 0, ... });
> >
> > Loop:
> >   ...
> >   # loop_mask_22 = PHI 
> >   ...
> >   vect_last_12.8_23 = .MASK_LOAD (_7, 8B, loop_mask_22);
> >   vect__4.9_27 = vect_last_12.8_23 * vect_cst__26;
> >   .MASK_STORE (_7, 8B, loop_mask_22, vect__4.9_27);
> >   ...
> >   next_mask_35 = .WHILE_ULT (_1, bnd.5_6, { 0, ... });
> >   ...
> >
> > Epilogue:
> >   _25 = .EXTRACT_LAST (loop_mask_22, vect_last_12.8_23);
> >
> > For RVV since we prefer len in loop control, after this patch for RVV:
> >
> > Loop:
> >   ...
> >   loop_len_22 = SELECT_VL;
> >   vect_last_12.8_23 = .MASK_LOAD (_7, 8B, loop_len_22);
> >   vect__4.9_27 = vect_last_12.8_23 * vect_cst__26;
> >   .MASK_STORE (_7, 8B, loop_len_22, vect__4.9_27);
> >   ...
> >
> > Epilogue:
> >   _25 = .VEC_EXTRACT (loop_len_22 + bias - 1, vect_last_12.8_23);
> >
> > Details of this approach:
> >
> > 1. Step 1 - Add 'vect_can_vectorize_extract_last_with_len_p'  to enable 
> live vectorization
> > for LEN loop control.
> >   
> >    This function we check whether target support:
> > - Use LEN as the loop control.
> > - Support VEC_EXTRACT optab.
> >
> > 2. Step 2 - Record LEN for loop control if 
> 'vect_can_vectorize_extract_last_with_len_p' is true.
> >
> > 3. Step 3 - Gerenate VEC_EXTRACT (v, LEN + BIAS - 1).
> >
> > The only difference between mask and len is that len is using length 
> generated by SELECT_VL and
> > use VEC_EXTRACT pattern. The rest of the live vectorization is totally 
> the same ARM SVE.
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog:
> >
> > * tree-vect-loop.cc (vectorizable_live_operation): Add loop len control.
> >
> > ---
> >  gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 78 ++-
> >  1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> > index bf8d677b584..a011e2dacb2 100644
> > --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> > +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> > @@ -10278,17 +10278,7 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
> >    /* No transformation required.  */
> >    if (loop_vinfo && LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P 
> (loop_vinfo))
> >  {
> > -   if (!direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
> > -    OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
> > -     {
> > -   if (dump_enabled_p ())
> > - dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> > - "can't operate on partial vectors "
> > - "because the target doesn't support extract "
> > - "last reduction.\n");
> > -   LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
> > -     }
> > -   else if (slp_node)
> > +   if (slp_node)
> >      {
> >    if (dump_enabled_p ())
> >  dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> > @@ -10308,9 +10298,28 @@ vectoriza

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-14 Thread juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai

Thanks Richi.

CC kewen to see whether this patch is suitable for powerpc and s390.



juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai
 
From: Richard Biener
Date: 2023-08-14 14:53
To: Ju-Zhe Zhong
CC: gcc-patches; richard.sandiford
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST 
vectorization
On Fri, 11 Aug 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:
 
> From: Ju-Zhe Zhong 
> 
> Hi, Richard and Richi.
> 
> This patch add support live vectorization by VEC_EXTRACT for LEN loop control.
 
OK.
 
Thanks,
Richard.
 
> Consider this following case:
> 
> #include 
> 
> #define EXTRACT_LAST(TYPE) \
>   TYPE __attribute__ ((noinline, noclone)) \
>   test_##TYPE (TYPE *x, int n, TYPE value) \
>   { \
> TYPE last; \
> for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j) \
>   { \
> last = x[j]; \
> x[j] = last * value; \
>   } \
> return last; \
>   }
> 
> #define TEST_ALL(T) \
>   T (uint8_t) \
> 
> TEST_ALL (EXTRACT_LAST)
> 
> ARM SVE IR:
> 
> Preheader:
>   max_mask_34 = .WHILE_ULT (0, bnd.5_6, { 0, ... });
> 
> Loop:
>   ...
>   # loop_mask_22 = PHI 
>   ...
>   vect_last_12.8_23 = .MASK_LOAD (_7, 8B, loop_mask_22);
>   vect__4.9_27 = vect_last_12.8_23 * vect_cst__26;
>   .MASK_STORE (_7, 8B, loop_mask_22, vect__4.9_27);
>   ...
>   next_mask_35 = .WHILE_ULT (_1, bnd.5_6, { 0, ... });
>   ...
> 
> Epilogue:
>   _25 = .EXTRACT_LAST (loop_mask_22, vect_last_12.8_23);
> 
> For RVV since we prefer len in loop control, after this patch for RVV:
> 
> Loop:
>   ...
>   loop_len_22 = SELECT_VL;
>   vect_last_12.8_23 = .MASK_LOAD (_7, 8B, loop_len_22);
>   vect__4.9_27 = vect_last_12.8_23 * vect_cst__26;
>   .MASK_STORE (_7, 8B, loop_len_22, vect__4.9_27);
>   ...
> 
> Epilogue:
>   _25 = .VEC_EXTRACT (loop_len_22 + bias - 1, vect_last_12.8_23);
> 
> Details of this approach:
> 
> 1. Step 1 - Add 'vect_can_vectorize_extract_last_with_len_p'  to enable live 
> vectorization
> for LEN loop control.
>
>This function we check whether target support:
> - Use LEN as the loop control.
> - Support VEC_EXTRACT optab.
> 
> 2. Step 2 - Record LEN for loop control if 
> 'vect_can_vectorize_extract_last_with_len_p' is true.
> 
> 3. Step 3 - Gerenate VEC_EXTRACT (v, LEN + BIAS - 1).
> 
> The only difference between mask and len is that len is using length 
> generated by SELECT_VL and
> use VEC_EXTRACT pattern. The rest of the live vectorization is totally the 
> same ARM SVE.
> 
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> 
> * tree-vect-loop.cc (vectorizable_live_operation): Add loop len control.
> 
> ---
>  gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 78 ++-
>  1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> index bf8d677b584..a011e2dacb2 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> @@ -10278,17 +10278,7 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
>/* No transformation required.  */
>if (loop_vinfo && LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo))
>  {
> -   if (!direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
> -OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
> - {
> -   if (dump_enabled_p ())
> - dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> - "can't operate on partial vectors "
> - "because the target doesn't support extract "
> - "last reduction.\n");
> -   LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
> - }
> -   else if (slp_node)
> +   if (slp_node)
>  {
>if (dump_enabled_p ())
>  dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> @@ -10308,9 +10298,28 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
>else
>  {
>gcc_assert (ncopies == 1 && !slp_node);
> -   vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
> -  &LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
> -  1, vectype, NULL);
> +   if (direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
> +   OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
> + vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
> +&LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
> +1, vectype, NULL);
> +   else if (convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,
> +   TYPE_MODE (vectype),
> +   TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype)))
> +!= CODE_FOR_nothing)
> + vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
> +   &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
> +   1, vectype, 1);
> +   else
> + {
> +   if (dump_enabled_p ())
> + dump_printf_loc (
> +   MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> +   "can

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-13 Thread Richard Biener via Gcc-patches

On Fri, 11 Aug 2023, juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai wrote:

> From: Ju-Zhe Zhong 
> 
> Hi, Richard and Richi.
> 
> This patch add support live vectorization by VEC_EXTRACT for LEN loop control.

OK.

Thanks,
Richard.

> Consider this following case:
> 
> #include 
> 
> #define EXTRACT_LAST(TYPE)\
>   TYPE __attribute__ ((noinline, noclone))\
>   test_##TYPE (TYPE *x, int n, TYPE value)\
>   {   \
> TYPE last;\
> for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j)   \
>   {   \
>   last = x[j];\
>   x[j] = last * value;\
>   }   \
> return last;  \
>   }
> 
> #define TEST_ALL(T)   \
>   T (uint8_t) \
> 
> TEST_ALL (EXTRACT_LAST)
> 
> ARM SVE IR:
> 
> Preheader:
>   max_mask_34 = .WHILE_ULT (0, bnd.5_6, { 0, ... });
> 
> Loop:
>   ...
>   # loop_mask_22 = PHI 
>   ...
>   vect_last_12.8_23 = .MASK_LOAD (_7, 8B, loop_mask_22);
>   vect__4.9_27 = vect_last_12.8_23 * vect_cst__26;
>   .MASK_STORE (_7, 8B, loop_mask_22, vect__4.9_27);
>   ...
>   next_mask_35 = .WHILE_ULT (_1, bnd.5_6, { 0, ... });
>   ...
> 
> Epilogue:
>   _25 = .EXTRACT_LAST (loop_mask_22, vect_last_12.8_23);
> 
> For RVV since we prefer len in loop control, after this patch for RVV:
> 
> Loop:
>   ...
>   loop_len_22 = SELECT_VL;
>   vect_last_12.8_23 = .MASK_LOAD (_7, 8B, loop_len_22);
>   vect__4.9_27 = vect_last_12.8_23 * vect_cst__26;
>   .MASK_STORE (_7, 8B, loop_len_22, vect__4.9_27);
>   ...
> 
> Epilogue:
>   _25 = .VEC_EXTRACT (loop_len_22 + bias - 1, vect_last_12.8_23);
> 
> Details of this approach:
> 
> 1. Step 1 - Add 'vect_can_vectorize_extract_last_with_len_p'  to enable live 
> vectorization
> for LEN loop control.
>
>This function we check whether target support:
> - Use LEN as the loop control.
> - Support VEC_EXTRACT optab.
> 
> 2. Step 2 - Record LEN for loop control if 
> 'vect_can_vectorize_extract_last_with_len_p' is true.
> 
> 3. Step 3 - Gerenate VEC_EXTRACT (v, LEN + BIAS - 1).
> 
> The only difference between mask and len is that len is using length 
> generated by SELECT_VL and
> use VEC_EXTRACT pattern. The rest of the live vectorization is totally the 
> same ARM SVE.
> 
> gcc/ChangeLog:
> 
>   * tree-vect-loop.cc (vectorizable_live_operation): Add loop len control.
> 
> ---
>  gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 78 ++-
>  1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> index bf8d677b584..a011e2dacb2 100644
> --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
> @@ -10278,17 +10278,7 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
>/* No transformation required.  */
>if (loop_vinfo && LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo))
>   {
> -   if (!direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
> -OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
> - {
> -   if (dump_enabled_p ())
> - dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> -  "can't operate on partial vectors "
> -  "because the target doesn't support extract "
> -  "last reduction.\n");
> -   LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
> - }
> -   else if (slp_node)
> +   if (slp_node)
>   {
> if (dump_enabled_p ())
>   dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
> @@ -10308,9 +10298,28 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
> stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
> else
>   {
> gcc_assert (ncopies == 1 && !slp_node);
> -   vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
> -  &LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
> -  1, vectype, NULL);
> +   if (direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
> +   OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
> + vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
> +&LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
> +1, vectype, NULL);
> +   else if (convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,
> +   TYPE_MODE (vectype),
> +   TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype)))
> +!= CODE_FOR_nothing)
> + vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
> +   &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
> +   1, vectype, 1);
> +   else
> + {
> +

[PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

2023-08-11 Thread juzhe . zhong

From: Ju-Zhe Zhong 

Hi, Richard and Richi.

This patch add support live vectorization by VEC_EXTRACT for LEN loop control.

Consider this following case:

#include 

#define EXTRACT_LAST(TYPE)  \
  TYPE __attribute__ ((noinline, noclone))  \
  test_##TYPE (TYPE *x, int n, TYPE value)  \
  { \
TYPE last;  \
for (int j = 0; j < n; ++j) \
  { \
last = x[j];\
x[j] = last * value;\
  } \
return last;\
  }

#define TEST_ALL(T) \
  T (uint8_t)   \

TEST_ALL (EXTRACT_LAST)

ARM SVE IR:

Preheader:
  max_mask_34 = .WHILE_ULT (0, bnd.5_6, { 0, ... });

Loop:
  ...
  # loop_mask_22 = PHI 
  ...
  vect_last_12.8_23 = .MASK_LOAD (_7, 8B, loop_mask_22);
  vect__4.9_27 = vect_last_12.8_23 * vect_cst__26;
  .MASK_STORE (_7, 8B, loop_mask_22, vect__4.9_27);
  ...
  next_mask_35 = .WHILE_ULT (_1, bnd.5_6, { 0, ... });
  ...

Epilogue:
  _25 = .EXTRACT_LAST (loop_mask_22, vect_last_12.8_23);

For RVV since we prefer len in loop control, after this patch for RVV:

Loop:
  ...
  loop_len_22 = SELECT_VL;
  vect_last_12.8_23 = .MASK_LOAD (_7, 8B, loop_len_22);
  vect__4.9_27 = vect_last_12.8_23 * vect_cst__26;
  .MASK_STORE (_7, 8B, loop_len_22, vect__4.9_27);
  ...

Epilogue:
  _25 = .VEC_EXTRACT (loop_len_22 + bias - 1, vect_last_12.8_23);

Details of this approach:

1. Step 1 - Add 'vect_can_vectorize_extract_last_with_len_p'  to enable live 
vectorization
for LEN loop control.
   
   This function we check whether target support:
- Use LEN as the loop control.
- Support VEC_EXTRACT optab.

2. Step 2 - Record LEN for loop control if 
'vect_can_vectorize_extract_last_with_len_p' is true.

3. Step 3 - Gerenate VEC_EXTRACT (v, LEN + BIAS - 1).

The only difference between mask and len is that len is using length generated 
by SELECT_VL and
use VEC_EXTRACT pattern. The rest of the live vectorization is totally the same 
ARM SVE.

gcc/ChangeLog:

* tree-vect-loop.cc (vectorizable_live_operation): Add loop len control.

---
 gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc | 78 ++-
 1 file changed, 62 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
index bf8d677b584..a011e2dacb2 100644
--- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
+++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.cc
@@ -10278,17 +10278,7 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
   /* No transformation required.  */
   if (loop_vinfo && LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo))
{
- if (!direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
-  OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
-   {
- if (dump_enabled_p ())
-   dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
-"can't operate on partial vectors "
-"because the target doesn't support extract "
-"last reduction.\n");
- LOOP_VINFO_CAN_USE_PARTIAL_VECTORS_P (loop_vinfo) = false;
-   }
- else if (slp_node)
+ if (slp_node)
{
  if (dump_enabled_p ())
dump_printf_loc (MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
@@ -10308,9 +10298,28 @@ vectorizable_live_operation (vec_info *vinfo, 
stmt_vec_info stmt_info,
  else
{
  gcc_assert (ncopies == 1 && !slp_node);
- vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
-&LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
-1, vectype, NULL);
+ if (direct_internal_fn_supported_p (IFN_EXTRACT_LAST, vectype,
+ OPTIMIZE_FOR_SPEED))
+   vect_record_loop_mask (loop_vinfo,
+  &LOOP_VINFO_MASKS (loop_vinfo),
+  1, vectype, NULL);
+ else if (convert_optab_handler (vec_extract_optab,
+ TYPE_MODE (vectype),
+ TYPE_MODE (TREE_TYPE (vectype)))
+  != CODE_FOR_nothing)
+   vect_record_loop_len (loop_vinfo,
+ &LOOP_VINFO_LENS (loop_vinfo),
+ 1, vectype, 1);
+ else
+   {
+ if (dump_enabled_p ())
+   dump_printf_loc (
+ MSG_MISSED_OPTIMIZATION, vect_location,
+ "can't operate on partial vectors "
+ "because the target doesn't support extract "
+

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

Re: [PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

[PATCH V4] VECT: Support loop len control on EXTRACT_LAST vectorization

19 matches

Site Navigation

Mail list logo

Footer information