Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Richard Sandiford]

"Richard Earnshaw (lists)"  writes:
> On 16/05/18 09:37, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
>> 
>> On 15/05/18 10:58, Richard Biener wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:20 AM Kyrill Tkachov
>>> 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi all,
 This is a respin of James's patch from:
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
 The original patch was approved and committed but was later reverted
>>> because of failures on big-endian.
 This tweaked version fixes the big-endian failures in
>>> aarch64_expand_vector_init by picking the right
 element of VALS to move into the low part of the vector register
>>> depending on endianness. The rest of the patch
 stays the same. I'm looking for approval on the aarch64 parts, as they
>>> are the ones that have changed
 since the last approved version of the patch.
 ---
 In the testcase in this patch we create an SLP vector with only two
 elements. Our current vector initialisation code will first duplicate
 the first element to both lanes, then overwrite the top lane with a new
 value.
 This duplication can be clunky and wasteful.
 Better would be to simply use the fact that we will always be
 overwriting
 the remaining bits, and simply move the first element to the corrcet
 place
 (implicitly zeroing all other bits).
 This reduces the code generation for this case, and can allow more
 efficient addressing modes, and other second order benefits for AArch64
 code which has been vectorized to V2DI mode.
 Note that the change is generic enough to catch the case for any vector
 mode, but is expected to be most useful for 2x64-bit vectorization.
 Unfortunately, on its own, this would cause failures in
 gcc.target/aarch64/load_v2vec_lanes_1.c and
 gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c , which expect to see many more
 vec_merge and vec_duplicate for their simplifications to apply. To fix
 this,
 add a special case to the AArch64 code if we are loading from two memory
 addresses, and use the load_pair_lanes patterns directly.
 We also need a new pattern in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_ternary_operation
 , to
 catch:
  (vec_merge:OUTER
     (vec_duplicate:OUTER x:INNER)
     (subreg:OUTER y:INNER 0)
     (const_int N))
 And simplify it to:
  (vec_concat:OUTER x:INNER y:INNER) or (vec_concat y x)
 This is similar to the existing patterns which are tested in this
 function,
 without requiring the second operand to also be a vec_duplicate.
 Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and tested on
 aarch64-none-elf.
 Note that this requires
 https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
 if we don't want to ICE creating broken vector zero extends.
 Are the non-AArch64 parts OK?
>>> Is (vec_merge (subreg ..) (vec_duplicate)) canonicalized to the form
>>> you handle?  I see the (vec_merge (vec_duplicate...) (vec_concat)) case
>>> also doesn't handle the swapped operand case.
>>>
>>> Otherwise the middle-end parts looks ok.
>> 
>> I don't see any explicit canonicalisation code for it.
>> I've updated the simplify-rtx part to handle the swapped operand case.
>> Is the attached patch better in this regard? I couldn't think of a clean
>> way to avoid
>> duplicating some logic (beyond creating a new function away from the
>> callsite).
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kyrill
>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Richard.
>>>
 Thanks,
 James
 ---
 2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
    Kyrylo Tkachov  
    * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_expand_vector_init):
 Modify
    code generation for cases where splatting a value is not
 useful.
    * simplify-rtx.c (simplify_ternary_operation): Simplify
    vec_merge across a vec_duplicate and a paradoxical subreg
>>> forming a vector
    mode to a vec_concat.
 2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
    * gcc.target/aarch64/vect-slp-dup.c: New.
>> 
>
> I'm surprised we don't seem to have a function in the compiler that
> performs this check:
>
> +   && rtx_equal_p (XEXP (x1, 0),
> +   plus_constant (Pmode,
> +  XEXP (x0, 0),
> +  GET_MODE_SIZE (inner_mode
>
> Without generating dead RTL (plus_constant will rarely be able to return
> a subexpression of the original pattern).  I would have thought this
> sort of test was not that uncommon.

FWIW, I think the way to write it without generating dead RTL is:

 rtx_equal_p (strip_offset (XEXP (x0, 0), _offset),
  strip_offset (XEXP (x1, 0), _offset))
 && known_eq (x1_offset, 

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Richard Earnshaw (lists)]

On 16/05/18 09:37, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> 
> On 15/05/18 10:58, Richard Biener wrote:
>> On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:20 AM Kyrill Tkachov
>> 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>> This is a respin of James's patch from:
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
>>> The original patch was approved and committed but was later reverted
>> because of failures on big-endian.
>>> This tweaked version fixes the big-endian failures in
>> aarch64_expand_vector_init by picking the right
>>> element of VALS to move into the low part of the vector register
>> depending on endianness. The rest of the patch
>>> stays the same. I'm looking for approval on the aarch64 parts, as they
>> are the ones that have changed
>>> since the last approved version of the patch.
>>> ---
>>> In the testcase in this patch we create an SLP vector with only two
>>> elements. Our current vector initialisation code will first duplicate
>>> the first element to both lanes, then overwrite the top lane with a new
>>> value.
>>> This duplication can be clunky and wasteful.
>>> Better would be to simply use the fact that we will always be
>>> overwriting
>>> the remaining bits, and simply move the first element to the corrcet
>>> place
>>> (implicitly zeroing all other bits).
>>> This reduces the code generation for this case, and can allow more
>>> efficient addressing modes, and other second order benefits for AArch64
>>> code which has been vectorized to V2DI mode.
>>> Note that the change is generic enough to catch the case for any vector
>>> mode, but is expected to be most useful for 2x64-bit vectorization.
>>> Unfortunately, on its own, this would cause failures in
>>> gcc.target/aarch64/load_v2vec_lanes_1.c and
>>> gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c , which expect to see many more
>>> vec_merge and vec_duplicate for their simplifications to apply. To fix
>>> this,
>>> add a special case to the AArch64 code if we are loading from two memory
>>> addresses, and use the load_pair_lanes patterns directly.
>>> We also need a new pattern in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_ternary_operation
>>> , to
>>> catch:
>>>  (vec_merge:OUTER
>>>     (vec_duplicate:OUTER x:INNER)
>>>     (subreg:OUTER y:INNER 0)
>>>     (const_int N))
>>> And simplify it to:
>>>  (vec_concat:OUTER x:INNER y:INNER) or (vec_concat y x)
>>> This is similar to the existing patterns which are tested in this
>>> function,
>>> without requiring the second operand to also be a vec_duplicate.
>>> Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and tested on
>>> aarch64-none-elf.
>>> Note that this requires
>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
>>> if we don't want to ICE creating broken vector zero extends.
>>> Are the non-AArch64 parts OK?
>> Is (vec_merge (subreg ..) (vec_duplicate)) canonicalized to the form
>> you handle?  I see the (vec_merge (vec_duplicate...) (vec_concat)) case
>> also doesn't handle the swapped operand case.
>>
>> Otherwise the middle-end parts looks ok.
> 
> I don't see any explicit canonicalisation code for it.
> I've updated the simplify-rtx part to handle the swapped operand case.
> Is the attached patch better in this regard? I couldn't think of a clean
> way to avoid
> duplicating some logic (beyond creating a new function away from the
> callsite).
> 
> Thanks,
> Kyrill
> 
>> Thanks,
>> Richard.
>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> James
>>> ---
>>> 2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
>>>    Kyrylo Tkachov  
>>>    * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_expand_vector_init):
>>> Modify
>>>    code generation for cases where splatting a value is not
>>> useful.
>>>    * simplify-rtx.c (simplify_ternary_operation): Simplify
>>>    vec_merge across a vec_duplicate and a paradoxical subreg
>> forming a vector
>>>    mode to a vec_concat.
>>> 2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
>>>    * gcc.target/aarch64/vect-slp-dup.c: New.
> 

I'm surprised we don't seem to have a function in the compiler that
performs this check:

+ && rtx_equal_p (XEXP (x1, 0),
+ plus_constant (Pmode,
+XEXP (x0, 0),
+GET_MODE_SIZE (inner_mode

Without generating dead RTL (plus_constant will rarely be able to return
a subexpression of the original pattern).  I would have thought this
sort of test was not that uncommon.

However, I don't think that needs to hold up this patch.

OK.

R.
> 
> vec-splat.patch
> 
> 
> diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> index 
> a2003fe52875f1653d644347bafd7773d1f01e91..6bf6c05535b61eef1021d46bcd8448fb3a0b25f4
>  100644
> --- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> +++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
> @@ -13916,9 +13916,54 @@ 

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Segher Boessenkool]

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:10:55AM +0100, Kyrill Tkachov wrote:
> On 16/05/18 10:42, Richard Biener wrote:
> >Segher, do you know where canonicalization rules are documented?
> >IIRC we do not actively try to canonicalize in most cases.
> 
> The documentation we have for RTL canonicalisation is at:
> https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Insn-Canonicalizations.html#Insn-Canonicalizations
> 
> It doesn't mention anything about vec_merge AFAICS so I couldn't convince 
> myself that there
> is a canonicalisation that we enforce (though maybe someone can prove me 
> wrong).

Many canonicalisations aren't documented, it's never clear which of the
canonicalisations are how canonical :-/


Segher

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Segher Boessenkool]

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:42:39AM +0200, Richard Biener wrote:
> Works for me.  Were you able to actually create such RTL from testcases?
> Segher, do you know where canonicalization rules are documented?
> IIRC we do not actively try to canonicalize in most cases.

md.texi, node "Insn Canonicalizations"?


Segher

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Kyrill Tkachov]

On 16/05/18 10:42, Richard Biener wrote:

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:37 AM Kyrill Tkachov

wrote:



On 15/05/18 10:58, Richard Biener wrote:

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:20 AM Kyrill Tkachov

wrote:


Hi all,
This is a respin of James's patch from:

https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html

The original patch was approved and committed but was later reverted

because of failures on big-endian.

This tweaked version fixes the big-endian failures in

aarch64_expand_vector_init by picking the right

element of VALS to move into the low part of the vector register

depending on endianness. The rest of the patch

stays the same. I'm looking for approval on the aarch64 parts, as they

are the ones that have changed

since the last approved version of the patch.
---
In the testcase in this patch we create an SLP vector with only two
elements. Our current vector initialisation code will first duplicate
the first element to both lanes, then overwrite the top lane with a new
value.
This duplication can be clunky and wasteful.
Better would be to simply use the fact that we will always be
overwriting
the remaining bits, and simply move the first element to the corrcet
place
(implicitly zeroing all other bits).
This reduces the code generation for this case, and can allow more
efficient addressing modes, and other second order benefits for AArch64
code which has been vectorized to V2DI mode.
Note that the change is generic enough to catch the case for any vector
mode, but is expected to be most useful for 2x64-bit vectorization.
Unfortunately, on its own, this would cause failures in
gcc.target/aarch64/load_v2vec_lanes_1.c and
gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c , which expect to see many more
vec_merge and vec_duplicate for their simplifications to apply. To fix
this,
add a special case to the AArch64 code if we are loading from two

memory

addresses, and use the load_pair_lanes patterns directly.
We also need a new pattern in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_ternary_operation
, to
catch:
  (vec_merge:OUTER
 (vec_duplicate:OUTER x:INNER)
 (subreg:OUTER y:INNER 0)
 (const_int N))
And simplify it to:
  (vec_concat:OUTER x:INNER y:INNER) or (vec_concat y x)
This is similar to the existing patterns which are tested in this
function,
without requiring the second operand to also be a vec_duplicate.
Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and tested on
aarch64-none-elf.
Note that this requires
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
if we don't want to ICE creating broken vector zero extends.
Are the non-AArch64 parts OK?

Is (vec_merge (subreg ..) (vec_duplicate)) canonicalized to the form
you handle?  I see the (vec_merge (vec_duplicate...) (vec_concat)) case
also doesn't handle the swapped operand case.

Otherwise the middle-end parts looks ok.

I don't see any explicit canonicalisation code for it.
I've updated the simplify-rtx part to handle the swapped operand case.
Is the attached patch better in this regard? I couldn't think of a clean

way to avoid

duplicating some logic (beyond creating a new function away from the

callsite).

Works for me.  Were you able to actually create such RTL from testcases?
Segher, do you know where canonicalization rules are documented?
IIRC we do not actively try to canonicalize in most cases.


The documentation we have for RTL canonicalisation is at:
https://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gccint/Insn-Canonicalizations.html#Insn-Canonicalizations

It doesn't mention anything about vec_merge AFAICS so I couldn't convince 
myself that there
is a canonicalisation that we enforce (though maybe someone can prove me wrong).

Kyrill


Richard.


Thanks,
Kyrill

Thanks,
Richard.


Thanks,
James
---
2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
Kyrylo Tkachov  
* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_expand_vector_init):

Modify

code generation for cases where splatting a value is not

useful.

* simplify-rtx.c (simplify_ternary_operation): Simplify
vec_merge across a vec_duplicate and a paradoxical subreg

forming a vector

mode to a vec_concat.
2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
* gcc.target/aarch64/vect-slp-dup.c: New.

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Richard Biener]

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 10:37 AM Kyrill Tkachov

wrote:


> On 15/05/18 10:58, Richard Biener wrote:
> > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:20 AM Kyrill Tkachov
> > 
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Hi all,
> >> This is a respin of James's patch from:
> > https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
> >> The original patch was approved and committed but was later reverted
> > because of failures on big-endian.
> >> This tweaked version fixes the big-endian failures in
> > aarch64_expand_vector_init by picking the right
> >> element of VALS to move into the low part of the vector register
> > depending on endianness. The rest of the patch
> >> stays the same. I'm looking for approval on the aarch64 parts, as they
> > are the ones that have changed
> >> since the last approved version of the patch.
> >> ---
> >> In the testcase in this patch we create an SLP vector with only two
> >> elements. Our current vector initialisation code will first duplicate
> >> the first element to both lanes, then overwrite the top lane with a new
> >> value.
> >> This duplication can be clunky and wasteful.
> >> Better would be to simply use the fact that we will always be
> >> overwriting
> >> the remaining bits, and simply move the first element to the corrcet
> >> place
> >> (implicitly zeroing all other bits).
> >> This reduces the code generation for this case, and can allow more
> >> efficient addressing modes, and other second order benefits for AArch64
> >> code which has been vectorized to V2DI mode.
> >> Note that the change is generic enough to catch the case for any vector
> >> mode, but is expected to be most useful for 2x64-bit vectorization.
> >> Unfortunately, on its own, this would cause failures in
> >> gcc.target/aarch64/load_v2vec_lanes_1.c and
> >> gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c , which expect to see many more
> >> vec_merge and vec_duplicate for their simplifications to apply. To fix
> >> this,
> >> add a special case to the AArch64 code if we are loading from two
memory
> >> addresses, and use the load_pair_lanes patterns directly.
> >> We also need a new pattern in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_ternary_operation
> >> , to
> >> catch:
> >>  (vec_merge:OUTER
> >> (vec_duplicate:OUTER x:INNER)
> >> (subreg:OUTER y:INNER 0)
> >> (const_int N))
> >> And simplify it to:
> >>  (vec_concat:OUTER x:INNER y:INNER) or (vec_concat y x)
> >> This is similar to the existing patterns which are tested in this
> >> function,
> >> without requiring the second operand to also be a vec_duplicate.
> >> Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and tested on
> >> aarch64-none-elf.
> >> Note that this requires
> >> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
> >> if we don't want to ICE creating broken vector zero extends.
> >> Are the non-AArch64 parts OK?
> > Is (vec_merge (subreg ..) (vec_duplicate)) canonicalized to the form
> > you handle?  I see the (vec_merge (vec_duplicate...) (vec_concat)) case
> > also doesn't handle the swapped operand case.
> >
> > Otherwise the middle-end parts looks ok.

> I don't see any explicit canonicalisation code for it.
> I've updated the simplify-rtx part to handle the swapped operand case.
> Is the attached patch better in this regard? I couldn't think of a clean
way to avoid
> duplicating some logic (beyond creating a new function away from the
callsite).

Works for me.  Were you able to actually create such RTL from testcases?
Segher, do you know where canonicalization rules are documented?
IIRC we do not actively try to canonicalize in most cases.

Richard.

> Thanks,
> Kyrill

> > Thanks,
> > Richard.
> >
> >> Thanks,
> >> James
> >> ---
> >> 2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
> >>Kyrylo Tkachov  
> >>* config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_expand_vector_init):
Modify
> >>code generation for cases where splatting a value is not
useful.
> >>* simplify-rtx.c (simplify_ternary_operation): Simplify
> >>vec_merge across a vec_duplicate and a paradoxical subreg
> > forming a vector
> >>mode to a vec_concat.
> >> 2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
> >>* gcc.target/aarch64/vect-slp-dup.c: New.

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Kyrill Tkachov]

On 15/05/18 10:58, Richard Biener wrote:

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:20 AM Kyrill Tkachov

wrote:


Hi all,
This is a respin of James's patch from:

https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html

The original patch was approved and committed but was later reverted

because of failures on big-endian.

This tweaked version fixes the big-endian failures in

aarch64_expand_vector_init by picking the right

element of VALS to move into the low part of the vector register

depending on endianness. The rest of the patch

stays the same. I'm looking for approval on the aarch64 parts, as they

are the ones that have changed

since the last approved version of the patch.
---
In the testcase in this patch we create an SLP vector with only two
elements. Our current vector initialisation code will first duplicate
the first element to both lanes, then overwrite the top lane with a new
value.
This duplication can be clunky and wasteful.
Better would be to simply use the fact that we will always be
overwriting
the remaining bits, and simply move the first element to the corrcet
place
(implicitly zeroing all other bits).
This reduces the code generation for this case, and can allow more
efficient addressing modes, and other second order benefits for AArch64
code which has been vectorized to V2DI mode.
Note that the change is generic enough to catch the case for any vector
mode, but is expected to be most useful for 2x64-bit vectorization.
Unfortunately, on its own, this would cause failures in
gcc.target/aarch64/load_v2vec_lanes_1.c and
gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c , which expect to see many more
vec_merge and vec_duplicate for their simplifications to apply. To fix
this,
add a special case to the AArch64 code if we are loading from two memory
addresses, and use the load_pair_lanes patterns directly.
We also need a new pattern in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_ternary_operation
, to
catch:
 (vec_merge:OUTER
(vec_duplicate:OUTER x:INNER)
(subreg:OUTER y:INNER 0)
(const_int N))
And simplify it to:
 (vec_concat:OUTER x:INNER y:INNER) or (vec_concat y x)
This is similar to the existing patterns which are tested in this
function,
without requiring the second operand to also be a vec_duplicate.
Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and tested on
aarch64-none-elf.
Note that this requires
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
if we don't want to ICE creating broken vector zero extends.
Are the non-AArch64 parts OK?

Is (vec_merge (subreg ..) (vec_duplicate)) canonicalized to the form
you handle?  I see the (vec_merge (vec_duplicate...) (vec_concat)) case
also doesn't handle the swapped operand case.

Otherwise the middle-end parts looks ok.


I don't see any explicit canonicalisation code for it.
I've updated the simplify-rtx part to handle the swapped operand case.
Is the attached patch better in this regard? I couldn't think of a clean way to 
avoid
duplicating some logic (beyond creating a new function away from the callsite).

Thanks,
Kyrill


Thanks,
Richard.


Thanks,
James
---
2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
   Kyrylo Tkachov  
   * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_expand_vector_init): Modify
   code generation for cases where splatting a value is not useful.
   * simplify-rtx.c (simplify_ternary_operation): Simplify
   vec_merge across a vec_duplicate and a paradoxical subreg

forming a vector

   mode to a vec_concat.
2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
   * gcc.target/aarch64/vect-slp-dup.c: New.


diff --git a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
index a2003fe52875f1653d644347bafd7773d1f01e91..6bf6c05535b61eef1021d46bcd8448fb3a0b25f4 100644
--- a/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
+++ b/gcc/config/aarch64/aarch64.c
@@ -13916,9 +13916,54 @@ aarch64_expand_vector_init (rtx target, rtx vals)
 	maxv = matches[i][1];
 	  }
 
-  /* Create a duplicate of the most common element.  */
-  rtx x = copy_to_mode_reg (inner_mode, XVECEXP (vals, 0, maxelement));
-  aarch64_emit_move (target, gen_vec_duplicate (mode, x));
+  /* Create a duplicate of the most common element, unless all elements
+	 are equally useless to us, in which case just immediately set the
+	 vector register using the first element.  */
+
+  if (maxv == 1)
+	{
+	  /* For vectors of two 64-bit elements, we can do even better.  */
+	  if (n_elts == 2
+	  && (inner_mode == E_DImode
+		  || inner_mode == E_DFmode))
+
+	{
+	  rtx x0 = XVECEXP (vals, 0, 0);
+	  rtx x1 = XVECEXP (vals, 0, 1);
+	  /* Combine can pick up this case, but handling it directly
+		 here leaves clearer RTL.
+
+		 This is load_pair_lanes, and also gives us a clean-up
+		 for store_pair_lanes.  */
+	  if (memory_operand (x0, 

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Richard Biener]

On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 10:20 AM Kyrill Tkachov

wrote:

> Hi all,

> This is a respin of James's patch from:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
> The original patch was approved and committed but was later reverted
because of failures on big-endian.
> This tweaked version fixes the big-endian failures in
aarch64_expand_vector_init by picking the right
> element of VALS to move into the low part of the vector register
depending on endianness. The rest of the patch
> stays the same. I'm looking for approval on the aarch64 parts, as they
are the ones that have changed
> since the last approved version of the patch.

> ---

> In the testcase in this patch we create an SLP vector with only two
> elements. Our current vector initialisation code will first duplicate
> the first element to both lanes, then overwrite the top lane with a new
> value.

> This duplication can be clunky and wasteful.

> Better would be to simply use the fact that we will always be
> overwriting
> the remaining bits, and simply move the first element to the corrcet
> place
> (implicitly zeroing all other bits).

> This reduces the code generation for this case, and can allow more
> efficient addressing modes, and other second order benefits for AArch64
> code which has been vectorized to V2DI mode.

> Note that the change is generic enough to catch the case for any vector
> mode, but is expected to be most useful for 2x64-bit vectorization.

> Unfortunately, on its own, this would cause failures in
> gcc.target/aarch64/load_v2vec_lanes_1.c and
> gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c , which expect to see many more
> vec_merge and vec_duplicate for their simplifications to apply. To fix
> this,
> add a special case to the AArch64 code if we are loading from two memory
> addresses, and use the load_pair_lanes patterns directly.

> We also need a new pattern in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_ternary_operation
> , to
> catch:

> (vec_merge:OUTER
>(vec_duplicate:OUTER x:INNER)
>(subreg:OUTER y:INNER 0)
>(const_int N))

> And simplify it to:

> (vec_concat:OUTER x:INNER y:INNER) or (vec_concat y x)

> This is similar to the existing patterns which are tested in this
> function,
> without requiring the second operand to also be a vec_duplicate.

> Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and tested on
> aarch64-none-elf.

> Note that this requires
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
> if we don't want to ICE creating broken vector zero extends.

> Are the non-AArch64 parts OK?

Is (vec_merge (subreg ..) (vec_duplicate)) canonicalized to the form
you handle?  I see the (vec_merge (vec_duplicate...) (vec_concat)) case
also doesn't handle the swapped operand case.

Otherwise the middle-end parts looks ok.

Thanks,
Richard.

> Thanks,
> James

> ---
> 2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  
>   Kyrylo Tkachov  

>   * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_expand_vector_init): Modify
>   code generation for cases where splatting a value is not useful.
>   * simplify-rtx.c (simplify_ternary_operation): Simplify
>   vec_merge across a vec_duplicate and a paradoxical subreg
forming a vector
>   mode to a vec_concat.

> 2018-05-15  James Greenhalgh  

>   * gcc.target/aarch64/vect-slp-dup.c: New.

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Christophe Lyon]

On 19 December 2017 at 00:36, Jeff Law  wrote:
> On 12/11/2017 08:44 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> In the testcase in this patch we create an SLP vector with only two
>> elements. Our current vector initialisation code will first duplicate
>> the first element to both lanes, then overwrite the top lane with a new
>> value.
>>
>> This duplication can be clunky and wasteful.
>>
>> Better would be to simply use the fact that we will always be overwriting
>> the remaining bits, and simply move the first element to the corrcet place
>> (implicitly zeroing all other bits).
>>
>> This reduces the code generation for this case, and can allow more
>> efficient addressing modes, and other second order benefits for AArch64
>> code which has been vectorized to V2DI mode.
>>
>> Note that the change is generic enough to catch the case for any vector
>> mode, but is expected to be most useful for 2x64-bit vectorization.
>>
>> Unfortunately, on its own, this would cause failures in
>> gcc.target/aarch64/load_v2vec_lanes_1.c and
>> gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c , which expect to see many more
>> vec_merge and vec_duplicate for their simplifications to apply. To fix this,
>> add a special case to the AArch64 code if we are loading from two memory
>> addresses, and use the load_pair_lanes patterns directly.
>>
>> We also need a new pattern in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_ternary_operation , to
>> catch:
>>
>>   (vec_merge:OUTER
>>  (vec_duplicate:OUTER x:INNER)
>>  (subreg:OUTER y:INNER 0)
>>  (const_int N))
>>
>> And simplify it to:
>>
>>   (vec_concat:OUTER x:INNER y:INNER) or (vec_concat y x)
>>
>> This is similar to the existing patterns which are tested in this function,
>> without requiring the second operand to also be a vec_duplicate.
>>
>> Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and tested on
>> aarch64-none-elf.
>>
>> Note that this requires 
>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
>> if we don't want to ICE creating broken vector zero extends.
>>
>> Are the non-AArch64 parts OK?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> James
>>
>> ---
>> 2017-12-11  James Greenhalgh  
>>
>>   * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_expand_vector_init): Modify code
>>   generation for cases where splatting a value is not useful.
>>   * simplify-rtx.c (simplify_ternary_operation): Simplify vec_merge
>>   across a vec_duplicate and a paradoxical subreg forming a vector
>>   mode to a vec_concat.
>>
>> 2017-12-11  James Greenhalgh  
>>
>>   * gcc.target/aarch64/vect-slp-dup.c: New.
>>
>>
>> 0001-patch-AArch64-Do-not-perform-a-vector-splat-for-vect.patch
>>
>>
>
>> diff --git a/gcc/simplify-rtx.c b/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
>> index 806c309..ed16f70 100644
>> --- a/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
>> +++ b/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
>> @@ -5785,6 +5785,36 @@ simplify_ternary_operation (enum rtx_code code, 
>> machine_mode mode,
>>   return simplify_gen_binary (VEC_CONCAT, mode, newop0, newop1);
>>   }
>>
>> +   /* Replace:
>> +
>> +   (vec_merge:outer (vec_duplicate:outer x:inner)
>> +(subreg:outer y:inner 0)
>> +(const_int N))
>> +
>> +  with (vec_concat:outer x:inner y:inner) if N == 1,
>> +  or (vec_concat:outer y:inner x:inner) if N == 2.
>> +
>> +  Implicitly, this means we have a paradoxical subreg, but such
>> +  a check is cheap, so make it anyway.
> I'm going to assume that N == 1 and N == 3 are handled elsewhere and do
> not show up here in practice.
>
>
> So is it advisable to handle the case where the VEC_DUPLICATE and SUBREG
> show up in the opposite order?  Or is there some canonicalization that
> prevents that?
>
> simplify-rtx bits are OK as-is if we're certain we're not going to get
> the alternate ordering of the VEC_MERGE operands.  ALso OK if you either
> generalize this chunk of code or duplicate & twiddle it to handle the
> alternate order.
>
> I didn't look at the aarch64 specific bits.
>

Hi James,

Your patch (r255946) introduced regressions on aarch64_be:
http://people.linaro.org/~christophe.lyon/cross-validation/gcc/trunk/255946/report-build-info.html

I filed https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=83663
to track this.

Thanks,

Christophe

> jeff
>

Re: [patch AArch64] Do not perform a vector splat for vector initialisation if it is not useful

[Jeff Law]

On 12/11/2017 08:44 AM, James Greenhalgh wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In the testcase in this patch we create an SLP vector with only two
> elements. Our current vector initialisation code will first duplicate
> the first element to both lanes, then overwrite the top lane with a new
> value.
> 
> This duplication can be clunky and wasteful.
> 
> Better would be to simply use the fact that we will always be overwriting
> the remaining bits, and simply move the first element to the corrcet place
> (implicitly zeroing all other bits).
> 
> This reduces the code generation for this case, and can allow more
> efficient addressing modes, and other second order benefits for AArch64
> code which has been vectorized to V2DI mode.
> 
> Note that the change is generic enough to catch the case for any vector
> mode, but is expected to be most useful for 2x64-bit vectorization.
> 
> Unfortunately, on its own, this would cause failures in
> gcc.target/aarch64/load_v2vec_lanes_1.c and
> gcc.target/aarch64/store_v2vec_lanes.c , which expect to see many more
> vec_merge and vec_duplicate for their simplifications to apply. To fix this,
> add a special case to the AArch64 code if we are loading from two memory
> addresses, and use the load_pair_lanes patterns directly.
> 
> We also need a new pattern in simplify-rtx.c:simplify_ternary_operation , to
> catch:
> 
>   (vec_merge:OUTER
>  (vec_duplicate:OUTER x:INNER)
>  (subreg:OUTER y:INNER 0)
>  (const_int N))
> 
> And simplify it to:
> 
>   (vec_concat:OUTER x:INNER y:INNER) or (vec_concat y x)
> 
> This is similar to the existing patterns which are tested in this function,
> without requiring the second operand to also be a vec_duplicate.
> 
> Bootstrapped and tested on aarch64-none-linux-gnu and tested on
> aarch64-none-elf.
> 
> Note that this requires 
> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2017-12/msg00614.html
> if we don't want to ICE creating broken vector zero extends.
> 
> Are the non-AArch64 parts OK?
> 
> Thanks,
> James
> 
> ---
> 2017-12-11  James Greenhalgh  
> 
>   * config/aarch64/aarch64.c (aarch64_expand_vector_init): Modify code
>   generation for cases where splatting a value is not useful.
>   * simplify-rtx.c (simplify_ternary_operation): Simplify vec_merge
>   across a vec_duplicate and a paradoxical subreg forming a vector
>   mode to a vec_concat.
> 
> 2017-12-11  James Greenhalgh  
> 
>   * gcc.target/aarch64/vect-slp-dup.c: New.
> 
> 
> 0001-patch-AArch64-Do-not-perform-a-vector-splat-for-vect.patch
> 
> 

> diff --git a/gcc/simplify-rtx.c b/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
> index 806c309..ed16f70 100644
> --- a/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
> +++ b/gcc/simplify-rtx.c
> @@ -5785,6 +5785,36 @@ simplify_ternary_operation (enum rtx_code code, 
> machine_mode mode,
>   return simplify_gen_binary (VEC_CONCAT, mode, newop0, newop1);
>   }
>  
> +   /* Replace:
> +
> +   (vec_merge:outer (vec_duplicate:outer x:inner)
> +(subreg:outer y:inner 0)
> +(const_int N))
> +
> +  with (vec_concat:outer x:inner y:inner) if N == 1,
> +  or (vec_concat:outer y:inner x:inner) if N == 2.
> +
> +  Implicitly, this means we have a paradoxical subreg, but such
> +  a check is cheap, so make it anyway.
I'm going to assume that N == 1 and N == 3 are handled elsewhere and do
not show up here in practice.


So is it advisable to handle the case where the VEC_DUPLICATE and SUBREG
show up in the opposite order?  Or is there some canonicalization that
prevents that?

simplify-rtx bits are OK as-is if we're certain we're not going to get
the alternate ordering of the VEC_MERGE operands.  ALso OK if you either
generalize this chunk of code or duplicate & twiddle it to handle the
alternate order.

I didn't look at the aarch64 specific bits.

jeff