Message ID | 20240627035635.354866-1-hongtao.liu@intel.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
Series | [V2] Fix wrong cost of MEM when addr is a lea. | expand |
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 5:57 AM liuhongt <hongtao.liu@intel.com> wrote: > > > But rtx_cost invokes targetm.rtx_cost which allows to avoid that > > recursive processing at any level. You're dealing with MEM [addr] > > here, so why's rtx_cost (addr, Pmode, MEM, 0, speed) not always > > the best way to deal with this? Since this is the MEM [addr] case > > we know it's not LEA, no? > The patch restrict MEM rtx_cost reduction only for register_operand + disp. > > > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32,}. > Ok for trunk? Looks good from my side, I'll leave approval to x86 maintainers though. Thanks, Richard. > > 416.gamess regressed 4-6% on x86_64 since my r15-882-g1d6199e5f8c1c0. > The commit adjust rtx_cost of mem to reduce cost of (add op0 disp). > But Cost of ADDR could be cheaper than XEXP (addr, 0) when it's a lea. > It is the case in the PR, the patch adjust rtx_cost to only handle reg > + disp, for other forms, they're basically all LEA which doesn't have > additional cost of ADD. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > PR target/115462 > * config/i386/i386.cc (ix86_rtx_costs): Make cost of MEM (reg + > disp) just a little bit more than MEM (reg). > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > * gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c: New test. > --- > gcc/config/i386/i386.cc | 5 ++++- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc > index d4ccc24be6e..ef2a1e4f4f2 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc > @@ -22339,7 +22339,10 @@ ix86_rtx_costs (rtx x, machine_mode mode, int outer_code_i, int opno, > address_cost should be used, but it reduce cost too much. > So current solution is make constant disp as cheap as possible. */ > if (GET_CODE (addr) == PLUS > - && x86_64_immediate_operand (XEXP (addr, 1), Pmode)) > + && x86_64_immediate_operand (XEXP (addr, 1), Pmode) > + /* Only hanlde (reg + disp) since other forms of addr are mostly LEA, > + there's no additional cost for the plus of disp. */ > + && register_operand (XEXP (addr, 0), Pmode)) > { > *total += 1; > *total += rtx_cost (XEXP (addr, 0), Pmode, PLUS, 0, speed); > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..ad50a6382bc > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c > @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mavx2 -fno-tree-vectorize -fno-pic" } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)movl[ \t]+.*, p1\.0\+[0-9]*\(,} 3 } } */ > + > +int > +foo (long indx, long indx2, long indx3, long indx4, long indx5, long indx6, long n, int* q) > +{ > + static int p1[10000]; > + int* p2 = p1 + 1000; > + int* p3 = p1 + 4000; > + int* p4 = p1 + 8000; > + > + for (long i = 0; i != n; i++) > + { > + /* scan for movl %edi, p1.0+3996(,%rax,4), > + p1.0+3996 should be propagted into the loop. */ > + p2[indx++] = q[indx++]; > + p3[indx2++] = q[indx2++]; > + p4[indx3++] = q[indx3++]; > + } > + return p1[indx6] + p1[indx5]; > +} > -- > 2.31.1 >
On Thu, Jun 27, 2024 at 5:57 AM liuhongt <hongtao.liu@intel.com> wrote: > > > But rtx_cost invokes targetm.rtx_cost which allows to avoid that > > recursive processing at any level. You're dealing with MEM [addr] > > here, so why's rtx_cost (addr, Pmode, MEM, 0, speed) not always > > the best way to deal with this? Since this is the MEM [addr] case > > we know it's not LEA, no? > The patch restrict MEM rtx_cost reduction only for register_operand + disp. > > > Bootstrapped and regtested on x86_64-pc-linux-gnu{-m32,}. > Ok for trunk? LGTM. Thanks, Uros. > > > 416.gamess regressed 4-6% on x86_64 since my r15-882-g1d6199e5f8c1c0. > The commit adjust rtx_cost of mem to reduce cost of (add op0 disp). > But Cost of ADDR could be cheaper than XEXP (addr, 0) when it's a lea. > It is the case in the PR, the patch adjust rtx_cost to only handle reg > + disp, for other forms, they're basically all LEA which doesn't have > additional cost of ADD. > > gcc/ChangeLog: > > PR target/115462 > * config/i386/i386.cc (ix86_rtx_costs): Make cost of MEM (reg + > disp) just a little bit more than MEM (reg). > > gcc/testsuite/ChangeLog: > * gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c: New test. > --- > gcc/config/i386/i386.cc | 5 ++++- > gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c > > diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc > index d4ccc24be6e..ef2a1e4f4f2 100644 > --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc > +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc > @@ -22339,7 +22339,10 @@ ix86_rtx_costs (rtx x, machine_mode mode, int outer_code_i, int opno, > address_cost should be used, but it reduce cost too much. > So current solution is make constant disp as cheap as possible. */ > if (GET_CODE (addr) == PLUS > - && x86_64_immediate_operand (XEXP (addr, 1), Pmode)) > + && x86_64_immediate_operand (XEXP (addr, 1), Pmode) > + /* Only hanlde (reg + disp) since other forms of addr are mostly LEA, > + there's no additional cost for the plus of disp. */ > + && register_operand (XEXP (addr, 0), Pmode)) > { > *total += 1; > *total += rtx_cost (XEXP (addr, 0), Pmode, PLUS, 0, speed); > diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c > new file mode 100644 > index 00000000000..ad50a6382bc > --- /dev/null > +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c > @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ > +/* { dg-do compile } */ > +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mavx2 -fno-tree-vectorize -fno-pic" } */ > +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)movl[ \t]+.*, p1\.0\+[0-9]*\(,} 3 } } */ > + > +int > +foo (long indx, long indx2, long indx3, long indx4, long indx5, long indx6, long n, int* q) > +{ > + static int p1[10000]; > + int* p2 = p1 + 1000; > + int* p3 = p1 + 4000; > + int* p4 = p1 + 8000; > + > + for (long i = 0; i != n; i++) > + { > + /* scan for movl %edi, p1.0+3996(,%rax,4), > + p1.0+3996 should be propagted into the loop. */ > + p2[indx++] = q[indx++]; > + p3[indx2++] = q[indx2++]; > + p4[indx3++] = q[indx3++]; > + } > + return p1[indx6] + p1[indx5]; > +} > -- > 2.31.1 >
diff --git a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc index d4ccc24be6e..ef2a1e4f4f2 100644 --- a/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc +++ b/gcc/config/i386/i386.cc @@ -22339,7 +22339,10 @@ ix86_rtx_costs (rtx x, machine_mode mode, int outer_code_i, int opno, address_cost should be used, but it reduce cost too much. So current solution is make constant disp as cheap as possible. */ if (GET_CODE (addr) == PLUS - && x86_64_immediate_operand (XEXP (addr, 1), Pmode)) + && x86_64_immediate_operand (XEXP (addr, 1), Pmode) + /* Only hanlde (reg + disp) since other forms of addr are mostly LEA, + there's no additional cost for the plus of disp. */ + && register_operand (XEXP (addr, 0), Pmode)) { *total += 1; *total += rtx_cost (XEXP (addr, 0), Pmode, PLUS, 0, speed); diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c new file mode 100644 index 00000000000..ad50a6382bc --- /dev/null +++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/i386/pr115462.c @@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ +/* { dg-do compile } */ +/* { dg-options "-O2 -mavx2 -fno-tree-vectorize -fno-pic" } */ +/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-times {(?n)movl[ \t]+.*, p1\.0\+[0-9]*\(,} 3 } } */ + +int +foo (long indx, long indx2, long indx3, long indx4, long indx5, long indx6, long n, int* q) +{ + static int p1[10000]; + int* p2 = p1 + 1000; + int* p3 = p1 + 4000; + int* p4 = p1 + 8000; + + for (long i = 0; i != n; i++) + { + /* scan for movl %edi, p1.0+3996(,%rax,4), + p1.0+3996 should be propagted into the loop. */ + p2[indx++] = q[indx++]; + p3[indx2++] = q[indx2++]; + p4[indx3++] = q[indx3++]; + } + return p1[indx6] + p1[indx5]; +}