similar to: [GlobalISel][AArch64] Toward flipping the switch for O0: Please give it a try!

Hi Renato, If Kristof is busy I can make runs on AArch64 Linux (Cortex-A53 and Cortex-57). Thanks, Evgeny Astigeevich Senior Compiler Engineer Compilation Tools ARM > -----Original Message----- > From: llvm-dev [mailto:llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org] On Behalf Of > Renato Golin via llvm-dev > Sent: Thursday, March 30, 2017 9:54 AM > To: Quentin Colombet > Cc: llvm-dev;

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 6:53 AM, Kristof Beyls via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > I've been digging a little bit deeper into the biggest performance > regressions I've observed. > > What I've observed so far is: > * A lot of the biggest regressions are caused by unnecessarily moving > floating point values through general purpose registers.

Hi Kristof, > On Apr 6, 2017, at 6:53 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > > I've been digging a little bit deeper into the biggest performance regressions I've observed. > > What I've observed so far is: > * A lot of the biggest regressions are caused by unnecessarily moving floating point values through general purpose registers. I've

I've kicked off a run to compare "-O0 -g" versus "-O0 -g -mllvm -global-isel -mllvm -global-isel-abort=2". I've selected the test-suite (albeit a version which is a couple of months old now) and a few short-running proprietary benchmarks to get data back quickly for an initial feel of where things are. This was running on Cortex-A57 AArch64 Linux. I saw one assertion

Hi Kristof, > On Apr 27, 2017, at 9:47 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > > Hi Quentin, > >> On 27 Apr 2017, at 00:48, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com <mailto:qcolombet at apple.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Kristof, >> >>> On Apr 6, 2017, at 6:53 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com

Hi Quentin, On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:47 AM Quentin Colombet via llvm-dev < llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > Hi Kristof, > > On May 9, 2017, at 3:41 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > > Great Quentin :). > > I've rerun the benchmarks comparing "-O0 -g" with "-O0 -g -mllvm > -global-isel -mllvm

Hi Amara, My reasons for preferring the switch to happen after the release branch is based on the following observations: * As far as I can see, the projects and products following top-of-trunk tend to test much more extensively than the testing that happens for llvm.org<http://llvm.org> releases. I expect that the llvm.org<http://llvm.org> release testing won’t find potential

Great Quentin :). I've rerun the benchmarks comparing "-O0 -g" with "-O0 -g -mllvm -global-isel -mllvm -global-isel-abort=2" on r302453, on AArch64 Cortex-A57. I indeed see almost no moves between GPR and FPR registers anymore (see details below for where I still see some). On geomean, I see 13% slow down (down from 17% on my previous run). On geomean, code size increase

On 18 Dec 2017, at 15:11, Amara Emerson <aemerson at apple.com<mailto:aemerson at apple.com>> wrote: On Dec 18, 2017, at 12:37 PM, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com<mailto:Kristof.Beyls at arm.com>> wrote: Hi Amara, My reasons for preferring the switch to happen after the release branch is based on the following observations: * As far as I can see, the

Hi Quentin, My only remaining concern is around ABI compatibility. The following commit seems to indicate that in the previous round of evaluation, we didn’t find an existing ABI compatibility issue: http://llvm.org/viewvc/llvm-project?view=revision&revision=311388. I haven’t looked into the details of this issue - so maybe I’m worried over nothing? I’m wondering if since then on your side

I don’t know of any further issues preventing us flipping the switch. At this point, I’d aim to flip the switch shortly after the creation of the 6.0.0 release branch, so that GlobalISel can harden a bit more enabled-by-default on trunk before it goes into an LLVM release (presumably 7.0.0 then). Thanks, Kristof > On 11 Dec 2017, at 17:08, Amara Emerson <aemerson at apple.com> wrote:

Unless there are still open issues with your patch, or our internal bots point to problems, I think time has come to flip the switch. Thanks Gerolf > On Dec 18, 2017, at 11:14 AM, Amara Emerson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > FYI all: the patch to enable it is available to review here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41362 <https://reviews.llvm.org/D41362>

FYI all: the patch to enable it is available to review here: https://reviews.llvm.org/D41362 Thanks, Amara > On Dec 18, 2017, at 5:44 PM, Amara Emerson via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Ok. We’ll look at what we can do to further stress test it in the next two months, additional suggestions from the community is welcome. Patch should be incoming to enable it

Great! I thought I had to look at our pipeline at O0 to make sure optimized regalloc was supported (https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33022 <https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33022> in mind). Glad I was wrong, it saves me some time. > On May 22, 2017, at 12:51 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > > >> On 22 May 2017, at 09:09, Diana Picus

Hi Kristof, Thanks for the measurements. > On May 24, 2017, at 6:00 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > >> >> On 23 May 2017, at 21:48, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com <mailto:qcolombet at apple.com>> wrote: >> >> Great! >> I thought I had to look at our pipeline at O0 to make sure optimized regalloc was

Hi Kristof, Thanks for going back so fast! > On May 24, 2017, at 12:57 PM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > >> >> On 24 May 2017, at 19:31, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com <mailto:qcolombet at apple.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Kristof, >> >> Thanks for the measurements. >> >>> On May 24, 2017, at

> On May 9, 2017, at 11:47 AM, Quentin Colombet via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > Hi Kristof, > >> On May 9, 2017, at 3:41 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com <mailto:kristof.beyls at arm.com>> wrote: >> >> Great Quentin :). >> >> I've rerun the benchmarks comparing "-O0 -g" with "-O0 -g

Hi Kristof, > On May 25, 2017, at 2:09 AM, Kristof Beyls <kristof.beyls at arm.com> wrote: > >> >> On 24 May 2017, at 22:01, Quentin Colombet <qcolombet at apple.com <mailto:qcolombet at apple.com>> wrote: >> >> Hi Kristof, >> >> Thanks for going back so fast! >> >>> On May 24, 2017, at 12:57 PM, Kristof Beyls

Hi all, I'm still running some validation on this, I'll send an email when it's done. If that goes well I don't have anything against making the switch. For the record, here's a summary of issues that were deferred for later on (some of which are optimization-ish and we might decide to never do at -O0 at all): * Crash in RegBankSelect for half fp types:

On 18 May 2017 at 09:06, Kristof Beyls <Kristof.Beyls at arm.com> wrote: > I think Diana found that when enabling r299283, the bootstrap failed with > llvm-tblgen segfaulting. > So there clearly is some work required there. Indeed. @Quentin, what is the status of that patch? Have you been working on it since then? Should I investigate the segfault more and send you a reproducer?