[x86_64,take,#2] PR target/106450: Tweak timode_remove_non_convertible_regs.

Message ID 040c01d8a3f8$a6056d20$f2104760$@nextmovesoftware.com
State New
Headers
Series [x86_64,take,#2] PR target/106450: Tweak timode_remove_non_convertible_regs. |

Commit Message

Roger Sayle July 30, 2022, 9:42 a.m. UTC
  Many thanks to H.J. for pointing out a better idiom for traversing
the USEs (and also DEFs) of TImode registers in an instruction.

This revised patched has been tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with
make bootstrap and make -k check, both with and without
--target_board=unix{-m32}, with no new failures.  Ok for mainline?


2022-07-30  Roger Sayle  <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
            H.J. Lu  <hjl.tools@gmail.com>

gcc/ChangeLog
        PR target/106450
        * config/i386/i386-features.cc (timode_check_non_convertible_regs):
        Do nothing if REGNO is set in the REGS bitmap, or is a hard reg.
        (timode_remove_non_convertible_regs): Update comment.
        Call timode_check_non_convertible_reg on all TImode register
        DEFs and USEs in each instruction.

gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
        PR target/106450
        * gcc.target/i386/pr106450.c: New test case.


Thanks (H.J. and Uros),
Roger
--

> -----Original Message-----
> From: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
> Sent: 28 July 2022 17:55
> To: Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
> Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> Subject: Re: [x86_64 PATCH] PR target/106450: Tweak
> timode_remove_non_convertible_regs.
> 
> On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 9:43 AM Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > This patch resolves PR target/106450, some more fall-out from more
> > aggressive TImode scalar-to-vector (STV) optimizations.  I continue to
> > be caught out by how far TImode STV has diverged from DImode/SImode
> > STV, and therefore requires additional (unexpected) tweaking.  Many
> > thanks to H.J. Lu for pointing out timode_remove_non_convertible_regs
> > needs to be extended to handle XOR (and other new operations).
> >
> > Unhelpfully the comment above this function states that it's the
> > TImode version of "remove_non_convertible_regs", which doesn't exist
> > anymore, so I've resurrected an explanatory comment from the git history.
> > By refactoring the checks for hard regs and already "marked" regs into
> > timode_check_non_convertible_regs itself, all its callers are
> > simplified.  This patch then uses GET_RTX_CLASS to generically handle
> > unary and binary operations, calling timode_check_non_convertible_regs
> > on each TImode register operand in the single_set's SET_SRC.
> >
> > This patch has been tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with make bootstrap
> > and make -k check, both with and without --target_board=unix{-m32},
> > with no new failures.  Ok for mainline?
> >
> >
> > 2022-07-28  Roger Sayle  <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
> >
> > gcc/ChangeLog
> >         PR target/106450
> >         * config/i386/i386-features.cc (timode_check_non_convertible_regs):
> >         Do nothing if REGNO is set in the REGS bitmap, or is a hard reg.
> >         (timode_remove_non_convertible_regs): Update comment.
> >         Call timode_check_non_convertible_regs on all register operands
> >         of supported (binary and unary) operations.
> 
> Should we use
> 
> df_ref ref;
> FOR_EACH_INSN_USE (ref, insn)
>    if (!DF_REF_REG_MEM_P (ref))
>      timode_check_non_convertible_regs (candidates, regs,
>               DF_REF_REGNO (ref));
> 
> to check each use?
> 
> > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> >         PR target/106450
> >         * gcc.target/i386/pr106450.c: New test case.
> >
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Roger
> > --
> --
> H.J.
  

Comments

Uros Bizjak July 31, 2022, 5:23 p.m. UTC | #1
On Sat, Jul 30, 2022 at 11:42 AM Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com> wrote:
>
>
> Many thanks to H.J. for pointing out a better idiom for traversing
> the USEs (and also DEFs) of TImode registers in an instruction.
>
> This revised patched has been tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with
> make bootstrap and make -k check, both with and without
> --target_board=unix{-m32}, with no new failures.  Ok for mainline?
>
>
> 2022-07-30  Roger Sayle  <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
>             H.J. Lu  <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
>
> gcc/ChangeLog
>         PR target/106450
>         * config/i386/i386-features.cc (timode_check_non_convertible_regs):
>         Do nothing if REGNO is set in the REGS bitmap, or is a hard reg.
>         (timode_remove_non_convertible_regs): Update comment.
>         Call timode_check_non_convertible_reg on all TImode register
>         DEFs and USEs in each instruction.
>
> gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
>         PR target/106450
>         * gcc.target/i386/pr106450.c: New test case.

LGTM.

Thanks,
Uros.

>
>
> Thanks (H.J. and Uros),
> Roger
> --
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: H.J. Lu <hjl.tools@gmail.com>
> > Sent: 28 July 2022 17:55
> > To: Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
> > Cc: GCC Patches <gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org>
> > Subject: Re: [x86_64 PATCH] PR target/106450: Tweak
> > timode_remove_non_convertible_regs.
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 9:43 AM Roger Sayle <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > This patch resolves PR target/106450, some more fall-out from more
> > > aggressive TImode scalar-to-vector (STV) optimizations.  I continue to
> > > be caught out by how far TImode STV has diverged from DImode/SImode
> > > STV, and therefore requires additional (unexpected) tweaking.  Many
> > > thanks to H.J. Lu for pointing out timode_remove_non_convertible_regs
> > > needs to be extended to handle XOR (and other new operations).
> > >
> > > Unhelpfully the comment above this function states that it's the
> > > TImode version of "remove_non_convertible_regs", which doesn't exist
> > > anymore, so I've resurrected an explanatory comment from the git history.
> > > By refactoring the checks for hard regs and already "marked" regs into
> > > timode_check_non_convertible_regs itself, all its callers are
> > > simplified.  This patch then uses GET_RTX_CLASS to generically handle
> > > unary and binary operations, calling timode_check_non_convertible_regs
> > > on each TImode register operand in the single_set's SET_SRC.
> > >
> > > This patch has been tested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu with make bootstrap
> > > and make -k check, both with and without --target_board=unix{-m32},
> > > with no new failures.  Ok for mainline?
> > >
> > >
> > > 2022-07-28  Roger Sayle  <roger@nextmovesoftware.com>
> > >
> > > gcc/ChangeLog
> > >         PR target/106450
> > >         * config/i386/i386-features.cc (timode_check_non_convertible_regs):
> > >         Do nothing if REGNO is set in the REGS bitmap, or is a hard reg.
> > >         (timode_remove_non_convertible_regs): Update comment.
> > >         Call timode_check_non_convertible_regs on all register operands
> > >         of supported (binary and unary) operations.
> >
> > Should we use
> >
> > df_ref ref;
> > FOR_EACH_INSN_USE (ref, insn)
> >    if (!DF_REF_REG_MEM_P (ref))
> >      timode_check_non_convertible_regs (candidates, regs,
> >               DF_REF_REGNO (ref));
> >
> > to check each use?
> >
> > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog
> > >         PR target/106450
> > >         * gcc.target/i386/pr106450.c: New test case.
> > >
> > >
> > > Thanks in advance,
> > > Roger
> > > --
> > --
> > H.J.
  

Patch

diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
index aa5de71..e4cc4a3 100644
--- a/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
+++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386-features.cc
@@ -1808,6 +1808,11 @@  static void
 timode_check_non_convertible_regs (bitmap candidates, bitmap regs,
 				   unsigned int regno)
 {
+  /* Do nothing if REGNO is already in REGS or is a hard reg.  */
+  if (bitmap_bit_p (regs, regno)
+      || HARD_REGISTER_NUM_P (regno))
+    return;
+
   for (df_ref def = DF_REG_DEF_CHAIN (regno);
        def;
        def = DF_REF_NEXT_REG (def))
@@ -1843,7 +1848,13 @@  timode_check_non_convertible_regs (bitmap candidates, bitmap regs,
     }
 }
 
-/* The TImode version of remove_non_convertible_regs.  */
+/* For a given bitmap of insn UIDs scans all instructions and
+   remove insn from CANDIDATES in case it has both convertible
+   and not convertible definitions.
+
+   All insns in a bitmap are conversion candidates according to
+   scalar_to_vector_candidate_p.  Currently it implies all insns
+   are single_set.  */
 
 static void
 timode_remove_non_convertible_regs (bitmap candidates)
@@ -1857,25 +1868,20 @@  timode_remove_non_convertible_regs (bitmap candidates)
     changed = false;
     EXECUTE_IF_SET_IN_BITMAP (candidates, 0, id, bi)
       {
-	rtx def_set = single_set (DF_INSN_UID_GET (id)->insn);
-	rtx dest = SET_DEST (def_set);
-	rtx src = SET_SRC (def_set);
-
-	if ((!REG_P (dest)
-	     || bitmap_bit_p (regs, REGNO (dest))
-	     || HARD_REGISTER_P (dest))
-	    && (!REG_P (src)
-		|| bitmap_bit_p (regs, REGNO (src))
-		|| HARD_REGISTER_P (src)))
-	  continue;
-
-	if (REG_P (dest))
-	  timode_check_non_convertible_regs (candidates, regs,
-					     REGNO (dest));
-
-	if (REG_P (src))
-	  timode_check_non_convertible_regs (candidates, regs,
-					     REGNO (src));
+	rtx_insn *insn = DF_INSN_UID_GET (id)->insn;
+	df_ref ref;
+
+	FOR_EACH_INSN_DEF (ref, insn)
+	  if (!DF_REF_REG_MEM_P (ref)
+	      && GET_MODE (DF_REF_REG (ref)) == TImode)
+	    timode_check_non_convertible_regs (candidates, regs,
+					       DF_REF_REGNO (ref));
+
+	FOR_EACH_INSN_USE (ref, insn)
+	  if (!DF_REF_REG_MEM_P (ref)
+	      && GET_MODE (DF_REF_REG (ref)) == TImode)
+	    timode_check_non_convertible_regs (candidates, regs,
+					       DF_REF_REGNO (ref));
       }
 
     EXECUTE_IF_SET_IN_BITMAP (regs, 0, id, bi)
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr106450.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr106450.c
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d16231f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr106450.c
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ 
+/* { dg-do compile { target int128 } } */
+/* { dg-options "-O2 -fsplit-paths" } */
+
+__int128 n;
+
+__attribute__ ((simd)) void
+foo (void)
+{
+  __int128 uninitialized;
+  unsigned __int128 *p = &n;
+
+  n >>= *p ? : 2;
+  n |= uninitialized;
+}