Hi all! It takes the current SLP vectorizer too long to vectorize my scalar code. I am talking here about functions that have a single, huge basic block with O(10^6) instructions. Here's an example: %0 = getelementptr float* %arg1, i32 49 %1 = load float* %0 %2 = getelementptr float* %arg1, i32 4145 %3 = load float* %2 %4 = getelementptr float* %arg2, i32 49 %5 = load float* %4 %6 = getelementptr float* %arg2, i32 4145 %7 = load float* %6 %8 = fmul float %7, %1 %9 = fmul float %5, %3 %10 = fadd float %9, %8 %11 = fmul float %7, %3 %12 = fmul float %5, %1 %13 = fsub float %12, %11 %14 = getelementptr float* %arg3, i32 16 %15 = load float* %14 %16 = getelementptr float* %arg3, i32 4112 %17 = load float* %16 %18 = getelementptr float* %arg4, i32 0 %19 = load float* %18 %20 = getelementptr float* %arg4, i32 4096 %21 = load float* %20 %22 = fmul float %21, %15 %23 = fmul float %19, %17 %24 = fadd float %23, %22 %25 = fmul float %21, %17 %26 = fmul float %19, %15 %27 = fsub float %26, %25 %28 = fadd float %24, %10 %29 = fadd float %27, %13 %30 = getelementptr float* %arg0, i32 0 store float %29, float* %30 %31 = getelementptr float* %arg0, i32 4096 store float %28, float* %31 ... and so on ... The SLP vectorizer would create some code like this: %219 = insertelement <4 x float> %218, float %185, i32 2 %220 = insertelement <4 x float> %219, float %197, i32 3 %221 = fmul <4 x float> %216, %220 %222 = fadd <4 x float> %221, %212 %223 = fmul <4 x float> %207, %220 .. %234 = bitcast float* %165 to <4 x float>* store <4 x float> %233, <4 x float>* %234, align 4 With the current SLP implementation 99.5% of the time is spent in the SLP vectorizer and I have the impression that this can be improved for my case. I believe that the SLP vectorizer has far more capabilities than I would need for these simple (but huge) functions. And I was hoping that any of you have an idea how to remove functionality of the SLP vectorizer such that it still can vectorize those simple functions...? Thanks, Frank
Hi Frank, The most time consuming part of SLP vectorizer (especially in cases like yours) is finding sets of consecutive stores. It's currently performed by a quadratic search (see routine SLPVectorizer::vectorizeStores) - we do pairwise comparisons between all pointers (but we do limit ourselves to look at at most 16 stores). I think it should be possible to group pointers with a common base, compute constant relative offset and just sort all of them - this way we’ll save a lot of expensive computations. However, I haven’t tried implementing this, and I guess there might be some hard corner cases too. Patches would be welcome here:) Thanks, Michael> On Jul 7, 2015, at 11:31 AM, Frank Winter <fwinter at jlab.org> wrote: > > Hi all! > > It takes the current SLP vectorizer too long to vectorize my scalar code. I am talking here about functions that have a single, huge basic block with O(10^6) instructions. Here's an example: > > %0 = getelementptr float* %arg1, i32 49 > %1 = load float* %0 > %2 = getelementptr float* %arg1, i32 4145 > %3 = load float* %2 > %4 = getelementptr float* %arg2, i32 49 > %5 = load float* %4 > %6 = getelementptr float* %arg2, i32 4145 > %7 = load float* %6 > %8 = fmul float %7, %1 > %9 = fmul float %5, %3 > %10 = fadd float %9, %8 > %11 = fmul float %7, %3 > %12 = fmul float %5, %1 > %13 = fsub float %12, %11 > %14 = getelementptr float* %arg3, i32 16 > %15 = load float* %14 > %16 = getelementptr float* %arg3, i32 4112 > %17 = load float* %16 > %18 = getelementptr float* %arg4, i32 0 > %19 = load float* %18 > %20 = getelementptr float* %arg4, i32 4096 > %21 = load float* %20 > %22 = fmul float %21, %15 > %23 = fmul float %19, %17 > %24 = fadd float %23, %22 > %25 = fmul float %21, %17 > %26 = fmul float %19, %15 > %27 = fsub float %26, %25 > %28 = fadd float %24, %10 > %29 = fadd float %27, %13 > %30 = getelementptr float* %arg0, i32 0 > store float %29, float* %30 > %31 = getelementptr float* %arg0, i32 4096 > store float %28, float* %31 > ... and so on ... > > The SLP vectorizer would create some code like this: > > %219 = insertelement <4 x float> %218, float %185, i32 2 > %220 = insertelement <4 x float> %219, float %197, i32 3 > %221 = fmul <4 x float> %216, %220 > %222 = fadd <4 x float> %221, %212 > %223 = fmul <4 x float> %207, %220 > .. > %234 = bitcast float* %165 to <4 x float>* > store <4 x float> %233, <4 x float>* %234, align 4 > > > With the current SLP implementation 99.5% of the time is spent in the SLP vectorizer and I have the impression that this can be improved for my case. I believe that the SLP vectorizer has far more capabilities than I would need for these simple (but huge) functions. And I was hoping that any of you have an idea how to remove functionality of the SLP vectorizer such that it still can vectorize those simple functions...? > > Thanks, > Frank > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev
I forgot to update the SLP thread from last week. I have a patch up for review that would allow creating wider vectors as requested, but may increase SLP compile time: http://reviews.llvm.org/D10950 An audit of the trunk backends shows that only PowerPC + QPX and x86 + AVX / AVX512 would potentially get an extra round of store merging from the use of 'getRegisterBitWidth()'. As reported in the phab comments, I didn't see any compile time hit on test-suite for an AVX machine. I'm very curious to know if that patch causes further blowup in this example. Frank, what causes a 10^6 instruction function to be generated? Can this be rolled into a loop? On Tue, Jul 7, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Michael Zolotukhin <mzolotukhin at apple.com> wrote:> Hi Frank, > > The most time consuming part of SLP vectorizer (especially in cases like > yours) is finding sets of consecutive stores. It's currently performed by a > quadratic search (see routine SLPVectorizer::vectorizeStores) - we do > pairwise comparisons between all pointers (but we do limit ourselves to > look at at most 16 stores). I think it should be possible to group pointers > with a common base, compute constant relative offset and just sort all of > them - this way we’ll save a lot of expensive computations. However, I > haven’t tried implementing this, and I guess there might be some hard > corner cases too. Patches would be welcome here:) > > Thanks, > Michael > > > On Jul 7, 2015, at 11:31 AM, Frank Winter <fwinter at jlab.org> wrote: > > > > Hi all! > > > > It takes the current SLP vectorizer too long to vectorize my scalar > code. I am talking here about functions that have a single, huge basic > block with O(10^6) instructions. Here's an example: > > > > %0 = getelementptr float* %arg1, i32 49 > > %1 = load float* %0 > > %2 = getelementptr float* %arg1, i32 4145 > > %3 = load float* %2 > > %4 = getelementptr float* %arg2, i32 49 > > %5 = load float* %4 > > %6 = getelementptr float* %arg2, i32 4145 > > %7 = load float* %6 > > %8 = fmul float %7, %1 > > %9 = fmul float %5, %3 > > %10 = fadd float %9, %8 > > %11 = fmul float %7, %3 > > %12 = fmul float %5, %1 > > %13 = fsub float %12, %11 > > %14 = getelementptr float* %arg3, i32 16 > > %15 = load float* %14 > > %16 = getelementptr float* %arg3, i32 4112 > > %17 = load float* %16 > > %18 = getelementptr float* %arg4, i32 0 > > %19 = load float* %18 > > %20 = getelementptr float* %arg4, i32 4096 > > %21 = load float* %20 > > %22 = fmul float %21, %15 > > %23 = fmul float %19, %17 > > %24 = fadd float %23, %22 > > %25 = fmul float %21, %17 > > %26 = fmul float %19, %15 > > %27 = fsub float %26, %25 > > %28 = fadd float %24, %10 > > %29 = fadd float %27, %13 > > %30 = getelementptr float* %arg0, i32 0 > > store float %29, float* %30 > > %31 = getelementptr float* %arg0, i32 4096 > > store float %28, float* %31 > > ... and so on ... > > > > The SLP vectorizer would create some code like this: > > > > %219 = insertelement <4 x float> %218, float %185, i32 2 > > %220 = insertelement <4 x float> %219, float %197, i32 3 > > %221 = fmul <4 x float> %216, %220 > > %222 = fadd <4 x float> %221, %212 > > %223 = fmul <4 x float> %207, %220 > > .. > > %234 = bitcast float* %165 to <4 x float>* > > store <4 x float> %233, <4 x float>* %234, align 4 > > > > > > With the current SLP implementation 99.5% of the time is spent in the > SLP vectorizer and I have the impression that this can be improved for my > case. I believe that the SLP vectorizer has far more capabilities than I > would need for these simple (but huge) functions. And I was hoping that any > of you have an idea how to remove functionality of the SLP vectorizer such > that it still can vectorize those simple functions...? > > > > Thanks, > > Frank > > > > _______________________________________________ > > LLVM Developers mailing list > > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev > > > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu > http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >-------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20150707/568d2a14/attachment.html>
Seemingly Similar Threads
- Data structure improvement for the SLP vectorizer
- [LLVMdev] loop vectorizer erroneously finds 256 bit vectors
- [LLVMdev] loop vectorizer erroneously finds 256 bit vectors
- [LLVMdev] loop vectorizer erroneously finds 256 bit vectors
- Data structure improvement for the SLP vectorizer