search for: costmodel

Hi, I'm looking for APIs that compute instruction costs, and noticed several of them. 1. A series of APIs of TargetTransformInfo that compute the cost of instructions of a particular type (e.g. getArithmeticInstrCost and getShuffleCost) 2. TargetTransformInfo::getOperationCost 3. CostModel::getInstructionCost::getInstructionCost in lib/Analysis/CostModel.cpp Only the first one is used extensively in LLVM's code base, but the second and third one seems more recently added and more general, making me think if they are designed to replace the first approach. So, what's the rec...

There is CostModel.cpp since LLVM3, I am wondering if anyone can give me an concrete example on how to use this pass to estimate cycles used in a given IR file. Thank you very much. Don

Sorry if double posted... might have sent this to old mailing list address... ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Stephen Thomas <stephen.warner.thomas at gmail.com> Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2015 at 10:39 AM Subject: How to use CostModel? To: LLVM Dev <llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu> Hi, I'm trying to use the built-in CostModel class to estimate the number of machine instructions for each IR Instruction. To get a feel for what kind of output the CostModel pass gives, I ran it on the command line like so: $ cat test.c int main...

...ass definitions are now > moved to VPlan.h, and I have a patch under review to move LoopVectorizationPlanner class out of > LoopVectorize.cpp (https://reviews.llvm.org/D41420). > > Next thing I'm working on is LoopVectorizationLegality, and I noticed that it has a component of > CostModel and optimization, which doesn't seem right from vectorizer's architectural perspective. > It appears that we are currently abusing Legal as the attic to throw a lot of things in order to avoid passing > many pointers around. From vectorizer's architectural point of view, we should...

...n.html). All VP*Recipe class definitions are now moved to VPlan.h, and I have a patch under review to move LoopVectorizationPlanner class out of LoopVectorize.cpp (https://reviews.llvm.org/D41420). Next thing I'm working on is LoopVectorizationLegality, and I noticed that it has a component of CostModel and optimization, which doesn't seem right from vectorizer's architectural perspective. It appears that we are currently abusing Legal as the attic to throw a lot of things in order to avoid passing many pointers around. From vectorizer's architectural point of view, we should distingui...

...com>; Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com>; Simon Pilgrim <llvm-dev at redking.me.uk>; Tian, Xinmin <xinmin.tian at intel.com>; Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com> > Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: [LV] any objections in moving isLegalMasked* check from Legal to CostModel? (Cleaning up LoopVectorizationLegality) > >> On 5 Jan 2018, at 21:01, Saito, Hideki via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> >> All, >> >> I'm trying to refactor LoopVectorize such that it has better >> conformance to VPlan visio...

...ntel.com>; Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com>; Simon Pilgrim <llvm-dev at redking.me.uk>; Tian, Xinmin <xinmin.tian at intel.com>; Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: [LV] any objections in moving isLegalMasked* check from Legal to CostModel? (Cleaning up LoopVectorizationLegality) On 01/05/2018 06:28 PM, Saito, Hideki wrote: > Amara, > >> I support this direction > Thanks for the support. > >> but are there actually any real world workloads where gather/scatter scalarisation would be worth it, on any micro-ar...

...ntel.com>; Sanjay Patel <spatel at rotateright.com>; Simon Pilgrim <llvm-dev at redking.me.uk>; Tian, Xinmin <xinmin.tian at intel.com>; Nema, Ashutosh <Ashutosh.Nema at amd.com> Subject: Re: [llvm-dev] RFC: [LV] any objections in moving isLegalMasked* check from Legal to CostModel? (Cleaning up LoopVectorizationLegality) > On 5 Jan 2018, at 21:01, Saito, Hideki via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > > All, > > I'm trying to refactor LoopVectorize such that it has better > conformance to VPlan vision going forward > (http:...

Thanks all for replying! I'll try the CostModel class first. Jingyue On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 3:47 AM, Jonas Wagner <jonas.wagner at epfl.ch> wrote: > Hi, > > 3. CostModel::getInstructionCost::getInstructionCost in >> lib/Analysis/CostModel.cpp >> > > I've been using the CostModel class in a project, and it...

CostModule::getInstructionCost also consults TTI ( http://llvm.org/docs/doxygen/html/CostModel_8cpp_source.html#l00380). No? Jingyue On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 4:05 PM, Chandler Carruth <chandlerc at google.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:54 PM, Jingyue Wu <jingyue at google.com> wrote: > >> I'm looking for APIs that compute instruction costs, and not...

...> I'm just running this on x86 ubuntu. after cd $build_dir cmake $src_root make The first strange this is that if I go into build_dir/test and type "make", it does nothing. In $build_dir, with "make check", I get errors like: /home/rkotler/llvmc/build/test/Analysis/CostModel/X86/Output/uitofp.ll.script: line 1: /home/rkotler//home/rkotler/llvmc/build/./bin/llvmc/build/./bin/llc: No such file or directory Certainly, ./bin/llc exists rkotler at mipssw006:~/llvmc/build$ ls ./bin/llc ./bin/llc

Hi Ryan, I think that it would be difficult to back port the CostModel back to LLVM3.0 because it uses the new TargetTransformInfo analysis. I also wanted to mention that only _lowering_ passes (target-specific optimization passes) may use TTI and the cost model. Higher-level canonicalization passes should not use it. Thanks, Nadav On Feb 6, 2013, at 1:26 AM, ryan...

Hi All, I wanted to do some basic cost estimation of Instruction/BB. There're CostModelAnalysis and CodeMetrics available in 3.1 and 3.2 releases. I've been using 3.0 for a while. I'm wondering whether similar analysis can be done in the old 3.0 release, e.g. back porting the implementation. Thank you! Best, Ryan -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was...

Hi Nadav, I'm interested in knowing how you'll work up the ARM cost model and how easy it'd be to split the work. As far as I can see, LoopVectorizationCostModel is the class that does all the work, with assistance from the target transform info. Do you think that updating ARMTTI would be the best course of action now, and inspect the differences in the CostModel later? I also haven't seen anything related to context switches and pipeline decisions on...

...elofs via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > As an update, after lots of fixes from a number of different people > (thanks everyone!), the current list of false-positives on `ninja > check-llvm` for the more stringent Gotcha A diagnostic is: > > LLVM :: Analysis/CostModel/X86/vselect-cost.ll > LLVM :: CodeGen/AMDGPU/GlobalISel/smrd.ll > LLVM :: CodeGen/AMDGPU/fp_to_uint.ll > LLVM :: CodeGen/AMDGPU/global-constant.ll > LLVM :: CodeGen/AMDGPU/merge-tbuffer.mir > LLVM :: CodeGen/AMDGPU/smrd.ll > LLVM :: CodeGen/AMDGPU/unhandled-loop-condit...

I have not done cmake builds for a while. I did a : cmake /source tree make and all seems okay but then many tests fail when i do a make check I'm using pristine tip of the llvm tree. Ideas? TIA. Reed

...iating X86TargetMachine and wondering whether it can be created from instances of TargetMachine or TargetData. Thank you! Best Regards, Ryan On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Nadav Rotem <nrotem at apple.com> wrote: > Hi Ryan, > > I think that it would be difficult to back port the CostModel back to > LLVM3.0 because it uses the new TargetTransformInfo analysis. I also > wanted to mention that only _lowering_ passes (target-specific optimization > passes) may use TTI and the cost model. Higher-level canonicalization > passes should not use it. > > Thanks, > Nadav...

...le=thumbv7 -mcpu=cortex-a15" I also run the vectorizer with -debug-only=loop-vectorize because it dumps the costs of all of the instructions with different vectorization factors, and it also detects the different kinds of shuffles that we support. > As far as I can see, LoopVectorizationCostModel is the class that does all the work, with assistance from the target transform info. The LoopVectorizerCostModel only predicts which IR will be generated when vectorizing to a specific vector width. It uses TTI to get the cost of each IR instruction. Chandler recently refactored TTI (thank!) and n...

I'd like to (re)start a discussion on a few gotchas in FileCheck that I've noticed working on various tests in llvm's suites. This begain in a review [1], but I'll try to summarize here so it gets the right audience before decisions are made on it (so to speak). 1: https://reviews.llvm.org/D77227 The main sticking point is the abundance of checks in FileCheck tests that appear to

...elease+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling MemorySanitizer.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling FunctionLoweringInfo.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling CtorUtils.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling DemoteRegToStack.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[2]: Compiling CostModel.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling FlattenCFG.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[2]: Compiling Delinearization.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling SafeStack.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling InstrEmitter.cpp for Release+Asserts build llvm[3]: Compiling Glob...