Re: [PATCH, V3] Optimize vec_splats of constant vec_extract for V2DI/V2DF, PR target 99293

2022-06-07 Thread will schmidt via Gcc-patches
On Tue, 2022-06-07 at 15:21 -0500, Segher Boessenkool wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 02:26:17PM -0500, will schmidt wrote:
> > On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 20:31 -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> > >  (define_insn "vsx_xxspltd_"
> > >[(set (match_operand:VSX_D 0 "vsx_register_operand" "=wa")
> > > -(unspec:VSX_D [(match_operand:VSX_D 1
> > > "vsx_register_operand"
> > > "wa")
> 
> Someone (you?) uses format=flawed.  You cannot reply to emails that
> contain patches that way, it messes up everything :-(

Right..  Something on my end may be posessed, several of my emails
today have tried to go all HTML on me, and or otherwise gone
format-wonky, which I do not want.  ;-) 


> 
> > > -(match_operand:QI 2 "u5bit_cint_operand" "i")]
> > > -  UNSPEC_VSX_XXSPLTD))]
> > > + (vec_duplicate:VSX_D
> > > +  (vec_select:
> > > +   (match_operand:VSX_D 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "wa")
> > > +   (parallel [(match_operand:QI 2 "const_0_to_1_operand"
> > > "i")]]
> > >"VECTOR_MEM_VSX_P (mode)"
> > 
> > Noting that
> > (define_mode_iterator VSX_D [V2DF V2DI])
> > (define_mode_attr VS_scalar [(V1TI  "TI")
> >  (V2DF  "DF")
> >  (V2DI  "DI")
> >  (V4SF  "SF")
> >  (V4SI  "SI")
> >  (V8HI  "HI")
> >  (V16QI "QI")])
> 
> Yeah, the comment
> ;; Map the scalar mode for a vector type
> is misleading, in more ways than one :-(
> 
> And the whole thing is just the same as VEC_base anyway, so it is
> much
> better to just use that.
> 
> 
> Segher



Re: [PATCH, V3] Optimize vec_splats of constant vec_extract for V2DI/V2DF, PR target 99293

2022-06-07 Thread Segher Boessenkool
On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 02:26:17PM -0500, will schmidt wrote:
> On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 20:31 -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> >  (define_insn "vsx_xxspltd_"
> >[(set (match_operand:VSX_D 0 "vsx_register_operand" "=wa")
> > -(unspec:VSX_D [(match_operand:VSX_D 1 "vsx_register_operand"
> > "wa")

Someone (you?) uses format=flawed.  You cannot reply to emails that
contain patches that way, it messes up everything :-(

> > -  (match_operand:QI 2 "u5bit_cint_operand" "i")]
> > -  UNSPEC_VSX_XXSPLTD))]
> > +   (vec_duplicate:VSX_D
> > +(vec_select:
> > + (match_operand:VSX_D 1 "gpc_reg_operand" "wa")
> > + (parallel [(match_operand:QI 2 "const_0_to_1_operand"
> > "i")]]
> >"VECTOR_MEM_VSX_P (mode)"
> 
> Noting that
> (define_mode_iterator VSX_D [V2DF V2DI])
> (define_mode_attr VS_scalar [(V1TI"TI")
>(V2DF  "DF")
>(V2DI  "DI")
>(V4SF  "SF")
>(V4SI  "SI")
>(V8HI  "HI")
>(V16QI "QI")])

Yeah, the comment
;; Map the scalar mode for a vector type
is misleading, in more ways than one :-(

And the whole thing is just the same as VEC_base anyway, so it is much
better to just use that.


Segher


Re: [PATCH, V3] Optimize vec_splats of constant vec_extract for V2DI/V2DF, PR target 99293

2022-06-07 Thread will schmidt via Gcc-patches
On Mon, 2022-06-06 at 20:31 -0400, Michael Meissner wrote:
> Optimize vec_splats of constant vec_extract for V2DI/V2DF, PR target
> 99293.
> 
> This is version 3 of the patch.  The original patch was:
> 
> > Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 12:26:02 -0400
> > Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Optimize vec_splats of constant vec_extract
> > for V2DI/V2DF, PR target 99293.
> > Message-ID: 
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-March/592420.html
> 
> Version 2 of the patch was:
> 
> > Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 10:49:26 -0400
> > Subject: [PATCH] Optimize vec_splats of constant V2DI/V2DF
> > vec_extract, PR target/99293
> > Message-ID: 
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc-patches/2022-May/594797.html
> 
> The differences between version 2 and version 3 was to clean up the
> description
> of what the patch does, and to make the example test case clear.
> 
> In PR target/99293, it was pointed out that doing:
> 
>   vector long long dest0, dest1, src;
>   /* ... */
>   dest0 = vec_splats (vec_extract (src, 0));
>   dest1 = vec_splats (vec_extract (src, 1));
> 
> would generate slower code.
> 
> It generates the following code on power8:
> 
>   ;; vec_splats (vec_extract (src, 0))
>   xxpermdi 0,34,34,3
>   xxpermdi 34,0,0,0
> 
>   ;; vec_splats (vec_extract (src, 1))
>   xxlor 0,34,34
>   xxpermdi 34,0,0,0
> 
> However on power9 and power10 it generates:
> 
>   ;; vec_splats (vec_extract (src, 0))
>   mfvsld 3,34
>   mtvsrdd 34,9,9
> 
>   ;; vec_splats (vec_extract (src, 1))
>   mfvsrd 9,34
>   mtvsrdd 34,9,9
> 
> This is due to the power9 having the mfvsrld instruction which can
> extract
> either 64-bit element into a GPR.  While there are alternatives for
> both
> vector registers and GPR registers, the register allocator prefers to
> put
> DImode into GPR registers.
> 
> In this case, it is better to have a single combiner pattern that can
> generate
> a single xxpermdi, instead of 2 insnsns (the extract and then the
> concat).
> This is true if the two operations are move from vector register and
> move to
> vector register.  As Segher pointed out in a previous version of the
> patch, the
> combiner already tries doing creating a (vec_duplicate (vec_select
> ...))
> pattern, but we didn't provide one.
> 
> This patch reworks vsx_xxspltd_ for V2DImode and V2DFmode so
> that it now
> uses VEC_DUPLICATE, which the combiner checks for.

Ok.

> 
> I have built Spec 2017 with this patch installed, and the cam4_r
> benchmark
> is the only benchmark that generated different code (3
> mfvsrld/mtvsrdd
> pairs of instructions were replaced with xxpermdi).
> 
> I have built bootstrap versions on the following systems and I have
> run
> the regression tests.  There were no regressions in the runs:
> 
>   Power9 little endian, --with-cpu=power9
>   Power10 little endian, --with-cpu=power10
>   Power8 big endian, --with-cpu=power8 (both 32-bit & 64-bit
> tests)

Ok.


> 
> Can I install this into the trunk?  After a burn-in period, can I
> backport
> and install this into GCC 11 and GCC 10 branches?
> 
> 2022-06-06   Michael Meissner  
> 
> gcc/
>   PR target/99293
>   * config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.cc (rtx_is_swappable_p): Remove
>   UNSPEC_VSX_XXSPLTD case.
>   * config/rs6000/vsx.md (UNSPEC_VSX_XXSPLTD): Delete.
>   (vsx_xxspltd_): Rewrite to use VEC_DUPLICATE.
> 
> gcc/testsuite:
>   PR target/99293
>   * gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-1.c: Update insn count.
>   * gcc.target/powerpc/pr99293.c: New test.
> ---
>  gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.cc|  1 -
>  gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md  | 19 +++
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/builtins-1.c |  2 +-
>  gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr99293.c| 51
> +++
>  4 files changed, 62 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/powerpc/pr99293.c
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.cc
> b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.cc
> index 275702fee1b..3160fcbdeca 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.cc
> +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/rs6000-p8swap.cc
> @@ -807,7 +807,6 @@ rtx_is_swappable_p (rtx op, unsigned int
> *special)
> case UNSPEC_VUPKLU_V4SF:
>   return 0;
> case UNSPEC_VSPLT_DIRECT:
> -   case UNSPEC_VSX_XXSPLTD:
>   *special = SH_SPLAT;
>   return 1;
> case UNSPEC_REDUC_PLUS:
> diff --git a/gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md b/gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md
> index 1b75538f42f..a1a1ce95195 100644
> --- a/gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md
> +++ b/gcc/config/rs6000/vsx.md
> @@ -296,7 +296,6 @@ (define_c_enum "unspec"
> UNSPEC_VSX_XXPERM
> 
> UNSPEC_VSX_XXSPLTW
> -   UNSPEC_VSX_XXSPLTD
> UNSPEC_VSX_DIVSD
> UNSPEC_VSX_DIVUD
> UNSPEC_VSX_DIVSQ

Ok.

> @@ -4673,16 +4672,18 @@ (define_insn "vsx_vsplt_di"
>  ;; V2DF/V2DI splat for use by vec_splat builtin
>  (define_insn "vsx_xxspltd_"
>[(set (match_operand:VSX_D 0 "vsx_register_operand" "