| Message ID | 20160519193811.GC40563@msticlxl57.ims.intel.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On 05/19/2016 01:38 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: > Hi, > > This patch adds new fields to _loop_vec_info structure to support loop > epilogue vectorization. > > Thanks, > Ilya > -- > gcc/ > > 2016-05-19 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com> > > * tree-vectorizer.h (struct _loop_vec_info): Add new fields > can_be_masked, required_masks, mask_epilogue, combine_epilogue, > need_masking, orig_loop_info. > (LOOP_VINFO_CAN_BE_MASKED): New. > (LOOP_VINFO_REQUIRED_MASKS): New. > (LOOP_VINFO_COMBINE_EPILOGUE): New. > (LOOP_VINFO_MASK_EPILOGUE): New. > (LOOP_VINFO_NEED_MASKING): New. > (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_LOOP_INFO): New. > (LOOP_VINFO_EPILOGUE_P): New. > (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_MASK_EPILOGUE): New. > (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_VECT_FACTOR): New. > * tree-vect-loop.c (new_loop_vec_info): Initialize new > _loop_vec_info fields. I don't see anything here that is inherently wrong/bad here; I think this would be fine once the whole set is approved. I also think if you find that you need additional similar kinds of fields, that would be OK as well. The one question I would ask -- do we ever need to copy VINFO data from one loop to a duplicate, and if so, ISTM that the code to copy that data would be a part of this patch. jeff
2016-06-16 8:11 GMT+03:00 Jeff Law <law@redhat.com>: > On 05/19/2016 01:38 PM, Ilya Enkovich wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> This patch adds new fields to _loop_vec_info structure to support loop >> epilogue vectorization. >> >> Thanks, >> Ilya >> -- >> gcc/ >> >> 2016-05-19 Ilya Enkovich <ilya.enkovich@intel.com> >> >> * tree-vectorizer.h (struct _loop_vec_info): Add new fields >> can_be_masked, required_masks, mask_epilogue, combine_epilogue, >> need_masking, orig_loop_info. >> (LOOP_VINFO_CAN_BE_MASKED): New. >> (LOOP_VINFO_REQUIRED_MASKS): New. >> (LOOP_VINFO_COMBINE_EPILOGUE): New. >> (LOOP_VINFO_MASK_EPILOGUE): New. >> (LOOP_VINFO_NEED_MASKING): New. >> (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_LOOP_INFO): New. >> (LOOP_VINFO_EPILOGUE_P): New. >> (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_MASK_EPILOGUE): New. >> (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_VECT_FACTOR): New. >> * tree-vect-loop.c (new_loop_vec_info): Initialize new >> _loop_vec_info fields. > > I don't see anything here that is inherently wrong/bad here; I think this > would be fine once the whole set is approved. I also think if you find > that you need additional similar kinds of fields, that would be OK as well. > > The one question I would ask -- do we ever need to copy VINFO data from one > loop to a duplicate, and if so, ISTM that the code to copy that data would > be a part of this patch. AFAIK we currently never copy vectorized loop in vectorizer. I never saw VINFO to be copied and I don't see corresponding API in tree-vectorizer.h. I'll double-check it. Thanks, Ilya > > jeff >
diff --git a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c index da98211..aac0df9 100644 --- a/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c +++ b/gcc/tree-vect-loop.c @@ -1125,6 +1125,12 @@ new_loop_vec_info (struct loop *loop) LOOP_VINFO_PEELING_FOR_GAPS (res) = false; LOOP_VINFO_PEELING_FOR_NITER (res) = false; LOOP_VINFO_OPERANDS_SWAPPED (res) = false; + LOOP_VINFO_CAN_BE_MASKED (res) = false; + LOOP_VINFO_REQUIRED_MASKS (res) = 0; + LOOP_VINFO_COMBINE_EPILOGUE (res) = false; + LOOP_VINFO_MASK_EPILOGUE (res) = false; + LOOP_VINFO_NEED_MASKING (res) = false; + LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_LOOP_INFO (res) = NULL; return res; } diff --git a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h index bd1d55a..4c19317 100644 --- a/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h +++ b/gcc/tree-vectorizer.h @@ -336,6 +336,23 @@ typedef struct _loop_vec_info : public vec_info { /* Mark loops having masked stores. */ bool has_mask_store; + /* True if vectorized loop can be masked. */ + bool can_be_masked; + /* If vector mask with 2^N elements is required to mask the loop + then N-th bit of this field is set to 1. */ + unsigned required_masks; + + /* True if we should vectorize loop epilogue with masking. */ + bool mask_epilogue; + /* True if we should combine main loop with epilogue using masking. */ + bool combine_epilogue; + /* True if loop vectorization requires masking. E.g. we want to + vectorize loop with low trip count. */ + bool need_masking; + /* For loops being epilogues of already vectorized loops + this points to the original vectorized loop. Otherwise NULL. */ + _loop_vec_info *orig_loop_info; + } *loop_vec_info; /* Access Functions. */ @@ -374,6 +391,12 @@ typedef struct _loop_vec_info : public vec_info { #define LOOP_VINFO_HAS_MASK_STORE(L) (L)->has_mask_store #define LOOP_VINFO_SCALAR_ITERATION_COST(L) (L)->scalar_cost_vec #define LOOP_VINFO_SINGLE_SCALAR_ITERATION_COST(L) (L)->single_scalar_iteration_cost +#define LOOP_VINFO_CAN_BE_MASKED(L) (L)->can_be_masked +#define LOOP_VINFO_REQUIRED_MASKS(L) (L)->required_masks +#define LOOP_VINFO_COMBINE_EPILOGUE(L) (L)->combine_epilogue +#define LOOP_VINFO_MASK_EPILOGUE(L) (L)->mask_epilogue +#define LOOP_VINFO_NEED_MASKING(L) (L)->need_masking +#define LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_LOOP_INFO(L) (L)->orig_loop_info #define LOOP_REQUIRES_VERSIONING_FOR_ALIGNMENT(L) \ ((L)->may_misalign_stmts.length () > 0) @@ -383,6 +406,14 @@ typedef struct _loop_vec_info : public vec_info { #define LOOP_VINFO_NITERS_KNOWN_P(L) \ (tree_fits_shwi_p ((L)->num_iters) && tree_to_shwi ((L)->num_iters) > 0) +#define LOOP_VINFO_EPILOGUE_P(L) \ + (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_LOOP_INFO(L) != NULL) + +#define LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_MASK_EPILOGUE(L) \ + (LOOP_VINFO_MASK_EPILOGUE (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_LOOP_INFO(L))) +#define LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_VECT_FACTOR(L) \ + (LOOP_VINFO_VECT_FACTOR (LOOP_VINFO_ORIG_LOOP_INFO(L))) + static inline loop_vec_info loop_vec_info_for_loop (struct loop *loop) {