similar to: Status of PBQP register allocator?

Hi, Yuanke, Thanks for writing this up. Let me back up a bit because the scheme I proposed last week doesn't work without further modification: within a particular "configuration region" (i.e., the code in between the LDTILECFG and the TILERELEASE (or next LDTILECFG)), each tile register can only be used with one shape, and in addition, no register can have its shape changed

On 9/4/20 3:37 AM, Luo, Yuanke wrote: > > Hi Hal, > > Thank you for the ideas that help us to improve the design, and sorry > for replying late. There is something I am not able to figure out and > there some special trait for tile RA. > You're quite welcome. > 1.X86RegisterInfo::getRegAllocationHints can tell RA which physical > register is preferred, but it

Fix typo From: Luo, Yuanke Sent: Friday, September 4, 2020 9:47 PM To: 'Hal Finkel' <hfinkel at anl.gov>; Topper, Craig <craig.topper at intel.com>; Kaylor, Andrew <andrew.kaylor at intel.com>; Philip Reames <listmail at philipreames.com>; llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org; florian_hahn at apple.com; Lu, Hongjiu <hongjiu.lu at intel.com> Subject: RE: [llvm-dev]

Both approaches are not exclusive. I would even think it makes sense to have a pre-split pass to prepare the graph, with a global view, and later on use use trySplit (or an equivalent) to handle the local coloring issues. From: Quentin Colombet [mailto:qcolombet at apple.com] Sent: 09 March 2015 23:08 To: Lang Hames Cc: Jonas Paulsson; llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu; Arnaud De Grandmaison Subject:

Hi Quentin, Jonas, Splitting fits in with PBQP reasonably well, at least conceptually. The PBQP graph is designed to be mutable, so there is no problem with updating it when splitting. As I see it, there are two logical places to integrate splitting into PBQP: 1) Split during spilling -- If a PBQP solution selects the spill option for a node, rather than spill immediately, split the interval

Hi Jakob, > Out of curiosity, how are you dealing with live range splitting and > coalescing in PBQP? I know you added the LoopSplitter pass. > > For linear scan in LLVM we are going in the direction of aggressive > coalescing before allocation, and on-demand splitting during allocation. > > I know that other allocators use no early coalescing, and coalesce during >

On Sep 20, 2010, at 7:53 AM, Lang Hames wrote: > I've just committed some changes to the PBQP allocator which are designed to make it easier to implement custom register allocation constraints. This is a quick summary of those changes, and of the status of the PBQP allocator in general. Thanks, Lang! Out of curiosity, how are you dealing with live range splitting and coalescing in PBQP?

Hi, I have worked a little on the PBQP register allocator, and it is quite clear (at least to me) that it is not even a serious alternative to RegAllocGreedy at the moment, due to the poor handling of spilling. As Arnaud wrote below, it is not optimizing spilling at all, but rather just spills anything that does not get an assignment. The result is a lot more spill/reload instructions than

Thanks Lang! I think we can use linear scan as work around for short term. Thanks for your help. Regards Sachin > -----Original Message----- > From: Lang Hames [mailto:lhames at gmail.com] > Sent: Sunday, November 15, 2009 10:08 AM > To: Sachin Punyani - I00202 > Cc: llvmdev at cs.uiuc.edu > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Crash in PBQP register allocator > > Hi Sachin, >

Hi Duncan, >> New PBQP solver. > > nice! Any chance of a quick summary of the state of the pbqp allocator and > who might want to use it? Sure. Here's an update, broken into three handy sections: Summary for LLVM users: --- PBQP is a heavyweight register allocator. A quick, not-at-all scientific look at SPEC2006 shows that compiling with -regalloc=pbqp increased runtime

This looks like a bug in the PBQP solver. I'm currently investigating. Cheers, Lang. On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 12:46 AM, <Sachin.Punyani at microchip.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > > Please see the two “.ll’ files attached. > > > > Command line used > > llc –march=pic16  –pre-RA-sched=list-burr –regalloc=pbqp new.obc > > > > The above test case

Hi All, I've just committed some changes to the PBQP allocator which are designed to make it easier to implement custom register allocation constraints. This is a quick summary of those changes, and of the status of the PBQP allocator in general. First a quick bit of background: The PBQP allocator is based on ideas described in [1]. I implemented this algorithm (with the improved heuristic

Hi Sachin, Yes. Bernhard Scholz and I have just discussed a fix for this. I hope to commit it in the next few days. I will let you know as soon as it goes in to the mainline. Regards, Lang. On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 5:34 PM, <Sachin.Punyani at microchip.com> wrote: > Hi Lang, > > Thanks for your inputs on the problem. I was just curious to know if you > got any opportunity to

Hi Sachin, Confirmed: This is being caused by a subtle issue in the heuristic PBQP solver. Specifically: R1/R2 reductions as currently implemented can, on rare occasions, lead to the heuristic solver failing to find a finite cost solution, even though one exists. The infinite cost solution will always be in violation of some rule of register allocation (failing to handle an interference, or

Hi Lang, Thanks for your inputs on the problem. I was just curious to know if you got any opportunity to work on the solution for this. Regards Sachin > -----Original Message----- > From: llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu [mailto:llvmdev-bounces at cs.uiuc.edu] On > Behalf Of Sachin.Punyani at microchip.com > Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:00 PM > Subject: Re: [LLVMdev] Crash

The simple C code on which im running the allocator is attached. And these are the set of commands. I dont understand ..guess i might be doing something very silly. Please help *Commands:* clang -emit-llvm -c test.c -o test.bc opt -mem2reg test.bc -o testssa.bc llc -regalloc=pbqp testssa.bc On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:59 AM, David Blaikie <dblaikie at gmail.com> wrote: > > > >

Hi, Please see the two ".ll' files attached. Command line used llc -march=pic16 -pre-RA-sched=list-burr -regalloc=pbqp new.obc The above test case crashes only when I use the combination of list-burr scheduler and pbqp register allocator. If any of them (scheduler or register allocator) is replaced with some alternate then I don't see the crash. I could not figure

Hello Sir, Im trying to test run pbqp register allocator for small C programs. by llc -regalloc=pbqp -debug <bitcode of the file> It is giving me segmentation fault for even very simple programs having loops or if statements. Please tell me where I'm going wrong. -- Regards, Smriti Jaiswal MTech Dept of Computer Science and Engg, IIT Kanpur -------------- next part --------------

On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 12:36 AM, Smriti Jaiswal <jaiswal.smriti at gmail.com>wrote: > Hello Sir, > > Im trying to test run pbqp register allocator for small C programs. > > by > > llc -regalloc=pbqp -debug <bitcode of the file> > > It is giving me segmentation fault for even very simple programs having > loops or if statements. > Please tell me where

Hi Lang, I'm surprised about the fact that you omit R1/R2 reductions in some cases. Can you give a more detailed description of the bug (e.g. a PBQP dump)? Best regards, Sebastian Lang Hames wrote: > Hi Sachin, llvm-dev, > > I've just committed a new PBQP solver which, among other things, > should take care of this bug. > > Please let me know how it works out for you.