similar to: [LLVMdev] vmlx forwarding an cortex A9 question

Hi Renato, Thanks for the answer, it confirms what I was suspecting. My problem is that this behavior is controlled by vmlx forwarding on cortex-a9 for which despite asking on this list, I couldn't get a clear understanding what this option is meant for. So here are my new questions: Why for cortex-a9 vmlx-forwarding is enabled by default ? Is it to guarantee correctness or for performance

Hi Bob, Seb, Renalto, My VMLA performance work was on Swift, rather than Cortex-A9. Sebastian - is vmlx-forwarding really the only variable you changed between your tests? As far as I can see the VMLx forwarding attribute only exists to restrict the application of one DAG combine optimization: PerformVMULCombine in ARMISelLowering.cpp, which turns (A + B) * C into (A * C) + (B * C). This

Hi Lang & Renato, I eventually set up a panda board with latest linaro delivery (eabi-hf). I did some experiments using my own compiler and LLVM 3.2 as back-end. I use same flagset for my compiler (front-end) and just invoke llc with and without vmlx-forwarding attribute. So base arguments to llc are: llc -march=arm -mcpu=cortex-a9 -mattr=+neon -float-abi=hard to which I added

On 8 February 2013 12:28, Sebastien DELDON-GNB <sebastien.deldon at st.com>wrote: > Why for cortex-a9 vmlx-forwarding is enabled by default ? Is it to > guarantee correctness or for performance purpose ? I’ve made some > experiments and DISABLING vmlx-forwarding for cortex-a9 leads to generation > of more vmla/vmls .f32 and significantly improve some benchmarks. I’ve not >

Hi Renato, Indeed problem is with generation of vmla.f64. Affected benchmark is MILC from SPEC 2006 suite and disabling vmlx forwarding gives a 10% speed-up on complete benchmark execution ! So it is worth a try. Now going back to vmla generation through LLMV intrinsic usage. I've looked at .td file and it seems to me that when there is a "pattern" to generate instruction, no

In theory, the backend should choose the best instructions for the selected target processor. VMLA is not always the best choice. Lang Hames did some measurements a while back to come up with the current behavior, but I don't remember exactly what he found. CC'ing Lang. On Feb 11, 2013, at 8:12 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at linaro.org> wrote: > On 11 February 2013 15:51,

Hi all, Can someone explain me why is vmlx forwarding option enabled for cortex-a9 ? and what the purpose of it ? Best Regards Seb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20121205/6d6a7a03/attachment.html>

I did the initial work on vmla formation. The default settings for cortex-a8 / a9 due to micro-architecture difference (i believe a8 TRM talks about vmla hazards) and extensive testing. That said, given the limitation of the current pre-RA scheduling pass, it's likely the use of vmla can caused regressions. Im not opposed to changing the setting for a9. However, it's not a good idea to

Hi all, Sorry for my naïve question but what is Swift ? Yes vmlx-forwarding is the only variable I changed in my tests. I did the experiment on another popular FP benchmark and observe a 14% speed-up only by disabling vmlx-forwarding. Best Regards Seb My VMLA performance work was on Swift, rather than Cortex-A9. Sebastian - is vmlx-forwarding really the only variable you changed between your

Hi Sebastien, How many extra vmlas did you see in 433.milc due to disabling -vmlx-forwarding? As I mentioned earlier, I saw only two additional integer vmlx instructions when I tested. Could you send me your 433.milc compile setup? (os, flags, compiler version, etc.). I'd like to try to reproduce your results. Cheers, Lang. On Tue, Feb 12, 2013 at 9:05 AM, Renato Golin <renato.golin at

On 15 February 2013 16:00, Sebastien DELDON-GNB <sebastien.deldon at st.com>wrote: > to which I added –mattr=-vmlx-forwarding to disable vmlx forwarding for > cortex-a9. > > When I DISABLE vmlx forwarding I’m observing a 7% speed-up on ref dataset > for MILC. So I’m observing something similar to what I’ve observed on STE > platform available on SNOWBALL board. > Hi

Understood, Same architecture, different micro-arch (implementation). Could this be the case that vmlx-forwarding make senses for SWIFT and not for ARM Cortex-A9 implementation ? It is enabled by default when -mcpu=cortex-a9 is used but test have made show significant improvements when disabled for cortex-A9 (STEricsson Nova platform). Best Regards Seb From: David Tweed [mailto:david.tweed at

On 12 February 2013 16:56, Sebastien DELDON-GNB <sebastien.deldon at st.com>wrote: > If this helps taking your decision, there are at least two benchmarks for > which disabling vmlx-forwarding makes a significant difference. > I think Evan's worry was to base this decision on visible and comprehensible benchmarks, such as the test-suite. If I get lucky I may be able to run

On 11 February 2013 15:51, Sebastien DELDON-GNB <sebastien.deldon at st.com>wrote: > Indeed problem is with generation of vmla.f64. Affected benchmark is MILC > from SPEC 2006 suite and disabling vmlx forwarding gives a 10% speed-up on > complete benchmark execution ! So it is worth a try. > Hi Sebastien, Ineed, worth having a look. Including Bob Wilson (who introduced the

Hi, I was going through Code of LLVM instruction code generation for ARM. I came across VMLA instruction hazards (Floating point multiply and accumulate). I was comparing assembly code emitted by LLVM and GCC, where i saw that GCC was happily using VMLA instruction for floating point while LLVM never used it, instead it used a pair of VMUL and VADD instruction. I wanted to know if there is any

On 8 February 2013 10:40, Sebastien DELDON-GNB <sebastien.deldon at st.com>wrote: > Hi all,**** > > ** ** > > Everything is in the tile, I would like to enforce generation of vmla.f32 > instruction for scalar operations on cortex-a9, so is there a LLMV neon > intrinsic available for that ?**** > > Hi Sebastien, LLVM doesn't use intrinsics when there is a

Hi Renato, No I've used LNT before and it might not be as simple as you think to get it working here. I'll see what I can do, but It's unlikely I'll have much time to spend on this topic in the coming weeks. I'm more interested coming back to my original question, and would like to know how to proceed if I want to define my own LLVM intrinsic to generate VMLA instruction. My

cat /proc/cpuinfo ? Are you sure it's generating VFMA and not VMLA? On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 9:35 AM, Sebastien DELDON-GNB < sebastien.deldon at st.com> wrote: > Hi Renato, > > It's definitively not A15. Can this be the case that NEON units for > cortex-A9 support it but isn't documented/recommended ? > And as mentioned before code is working ! > > Seb >

Hi all, Everything is in the tile, I would like to enforce generation of vmla.f32 instruction for scalar operations on cortex-a9, so is there a LLMV neon intrinsic available for that ? Thanks for your answers Best Regards Seb -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:

On 12 February 2013 10:25, Sebastien DELDON-GNB <sebastien.deldon at st.com>wrote: > Same architecture, different micro-arch (implementation). Could this be > the case that vmlx-forwarding make senses for SWIFT and not for ARM > Cortex-A9 implementation ? It is enabled by default when –mcpu=cortex-a9 is > used but test have made show significant improvements when disabled for