Hi Nadav, On 2013-08-12 12:59 PM, "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com> wrote:>Hi Paul, > >You can read about it here: >http://blog.llvm.org/2011/12/llvm-31-vector-changes.html > >> Hi, >> >> I am trying to understand how vector type legalization works. In >>particular, I'm looking at i8 vector types on x86 (with sse42 features) >> >> v3i8 gets widened to v4i8 and then operations get unrolled (scalarized) >>because v4i8 is not a legal type whereas v4i8 gets > >This does not sound right. v3i8 -> v4i8 is okay. But the next step >should be v4i8 -> v4i32. The operation nay be scalarized in the vector >legalization phase.What I'm looking at is a v3i8 add. In DAGTypeLegalizer::WidenVecRes_Binary the operation gets scalarized (DAG.UnrollVector). The input N is "0x51c1d60: v3i8 = add 0x51c1860, 0x51c1c60 [ORD=5] [ID=0]" and the WidenVT is v4i8. The code ends up in the NumElts == 1 path which causes scalarization. The debug dump shows "Widen node result 0: 0x563dd20: v3i8 = add 0x563d820, 0x563dc20 [ORD=5] [ID=0]". To me it doesn't look like it's possible to both widen and promote an operation.. Paul> >> promoted to v4i32. Why doesn't v3i8 (or even v4i8) get widened to >>v16i8? Alternatively, v3i8 could be widened to v4i8 then promoted to >>v4i32 but this doesn't happen either. >> >> Can anyone provide some insight into why vector type legalization works >>the way it does? >> >> Thanks, >> paul >> >> _______________________________________________ >> LLVM Developers mailing list >> LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu >> http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev >
This is a bug in the implementation of WidenVecRes_Binary. On line 1546 it assumes that “Widen” is the last phase of type-legalization and we check if the result is a legal type. But actually we want to continue and promote the elements of the vector. In other cases we may want to widen (to the next power of two) and later split in half because the vector is too big. On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:46 AM, Redmond, Paul <paul.redmond at intel.com> wrote:> Hi Nadav, > > On 2013-08-12 12:59 PM, "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > >> Hi Paul, >> >> You can read about it here: >> http://blog.llvm.org/2011/12/llvm-31-vector-changes.html >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am trying to understand how vector type legalization works. In >>> particular, I'm looking at i8 vector types on x86 (with sse42 features) >>> >>> v3i8 gets widened to v4i8 and then operations get unrolled (scalarized) >>> because v4i8 is not a legal type whereas v4i8 gets >> >> This does not sound right. v3i8 -> v4i8 is okay. But the next step >> should be v4i8 -> v4i32. The operation nay be scalarized in the vector >> legalization phase. > > What I'm looking at is a v3i8 add. In DAGTypeLegalizer::WidenVecRes_Binary > the operation gets scalarized (DAG.UnrollVector). The input N is > "0x51c1d60: v3i8 = add 0x51c1860, 0x51c1c60 [ORD=5] [ID=0]" and the > WidenVT is v4i8. The code ends up in the NumElts == 1 path which causes > scalarization. > > The debug dump shows "Widen node result 0: 0x563dd20: v3i8 = add > 0x563d820, 0x563dc20 [ORD=5] [ID=0]". To me it doesn't look like it's > possible to both widen and promote an operation.. > > Paul > >> >>> promoted to v4i32. Why doesn't v3i8 (or even v4i8) get widened to >>> v16i8? Alternatively, v3i8 could be widened to v4i8 then promoted to >>> v4i32 but this doesn't happen either. >>> >>> Can anyone provide some insight into why vector type legalization works >>> the way it does? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> paul >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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/20130812/94191648/attachment.html>
Hi Nadav,
From: Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com<mailto:nrotem at apple.com>>
Date: Monday, 12 August, 2013 1:59 PM
To: Paul Redmond <paul.redmond at intel.com<mailto:paul.redmond at
intel.com>>
Cc: LLVM Developers Mailing List <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:llvmdev at
cs.uiuc.edu>>
Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] vector type legalization
This is a bug in the implementation of WidenVecRes_Binary. On line 1546 it
assumes that “Widen” is the last phase of type-legalization and we check if the
result is a legal type. But actually we want to continue and promote the
elements of the vector. In other cases we may want to widen (to the next power
of two) and later split in half because the vector is too big.
Thanks for the tip. I modified WidenVecRes_Binary match
WidenVecRes_{Unary/Ternary} and it does the promotion and generates much better
code. Why is WidenVecRes_Binary so much more complicated than the Unary/Binary
functions? None of the operations in the cases for WidenVecRes_Binary seem any
more special then the operations that use WidenVecRes_Unary..
paul
On Aug 12, 2013, at 10:46 AM, Redmond, Paul <paul.redmond at
intel.com<mailto:paul.redmond at intel.com>> wrote:
Hi Nadav,
On 2013-08-12 12:59 PM, "Nadav Rotem" <nrotem at
apple.com<mailto:nrotem at apple.com>> wrote:
Hi Paul,
You can read about it here:
http://blog.llvm.org/2011/12/llvm-31-vector-changes.html
Hi,
I am trying to understand how vector type legalization works. In
particular, I'm looking at i8 vector types on x86 (with sse42 features)
v3i8 gets widened to v4i8 and then operations get unrolled (scalarized)
because v4i8 is not a legal type whereas v4i8 gets
This does not sound right. v3i8 -> v4i8 is okay. But the next step
should be v4i8 -> v4i32. The operation nay be scalarized in the vector
legalization phase.
What I'm looking at is a v3i8 add. In DAGTypeLegalizer::WidenVecRes_Binary
the operation gets scalarized (DAG.UnrollVector). The input N is
"0x51c1d60: v3i8 = add 0x51c1860, 0x51c1c60 [ORD=5] [ID=0]" and the
WidenVT is v4i8. The code ends up in the NumElts == 1 path which causes
scalarization.
The debug dump shows "Widen node result 0: 0x563dd20: v3i8 = add
0x563d820, 0x563dc20 [ORD=5] [ID=0]". To me it doesn't look like
it's
possible to both widen and promote an operation..
Paul
promoted to v4i32. Why doesn't v3i8 (or even v4i8) get widened to
v16i8? Alternatively, v3i8 could be widened to v4i8 then promoted to
v4i32 but this doesn't happen either.
Can anyone provide some insight into why vector type legalization works
the way it does?
Thanks,
paul
_______________________________________________
LLVM Developers mailing list
LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu<mailto:LLVMdev at cs.uiuc.edu>
http://llvm.cs.uiuc.edu
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/llvmdev