On Fri, 26 Sep 2025 12:00:31 GMT, Bhavana Kilambi <[email protected]> wrote:

> This patch adds mid-end support for vectorized add/mul reduction operations 
> for half floats. It also includes backend aarch64 support for these 
> operations. Only vectorization support through autovectorization is added as 
> VectorAPI currently does not support Float16 vector species.
> 
> Both add and mul reduction vectorized through autovectorization mandate the 
> implementation to be strictly ordered. The following is how each of these 
> reductions is implemented for different aarch64 targets -
> 
> **For AddReduction :**
> On Neon only targets (UseSVE = 0): Generates scalarized additions using the 
> scalar `fadd` instruction for both 8B and 16B vector lengths. This is because 
> Neon does not provide a direct instruction for computing strictly ordered 
> floating point add reduction.
> 
> On SVE targets (UseSVE > 0): Generates the `fadda` instruction which computes 
> add reduction for floating point in strict order.
> 
> **For MulReduction :**
> Both Neon and SVE do not provide a direct instruction for computing strictly 
> ordered floating point multiply reduction. For vector lengths of 8B and 16B, 
> a scalarized sequence of scalar `fmul` instructions is generated and multiply 
> reduction for vector lengths > 16B is not supported.
> 
> Below is the performance of the two newly added microbenchmarks in 
> `Float16OperationsBenchmark.java` tested on three different aarch64 machines 
> and with varying `MaxVectorSize` -
> 
> Note: On all machines, the score (ops/ms) is compared with the master branch 
> without this patch which generates a sequence of loads (`ldrsh`) to load the 
> FP16 value into an FPR and a scalar `fadd/fmul` to add/multiply the loaded 
> value to the running sum/product. The ratios given below are the ratios 
> between the throughput with this patch and the throughput without this patch.
> Ratio > 1 indicates the performance with this patch is better than the master 
> branch.
> 
> **N1 (UseSVE = 0, max vector length = 16B):**
> 
> Benchmark         vectorDim  Mode   Cnt  8B     16B
> ReductionAddFP16  256        thrpt  9    1.41   1.40
> ReductionAddFP16  512        thrpt  9    1.41   1.41
> ReductionAddFP16  1024       thrpt  9    1.43   1.40
> ReductionAddFP16  2048       thrpt  9    1.43   1.40
> ReductionMulFP16  256        thrpt  9    1.22   1.22
> ReductionMulFP16  512        thrpt  9    1.21   1.23
> ReductionMulFP16  1024       thrpt  9    1.21   1.22
> ReductionMulFP16  2048       thrpt  9    1.20   1.22
> 
> 
> On N1, the scalarized sequence of `fadd/fmul` are generated for both 
> `MaxVectorSize` of 8B and 16B for add reduction ...

src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/aarch64_vector.ad line 272:

> 270:         if (length_in_bytes > 16 || !is_feat_fp16_supported()) {
> 271:           return false;
> 272:         }

Reductions with `length_in_bytes < 8` should also be skipped. Because such 
operations are not supported now, while the IRs with 32-bit vector size might 
exist, right?

src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/aarch64_vector.ad line 3427:

> 3425:              
> (!VM_Version::use_neon_for_vector(Matcher::vector_length_in_bytes(n->in(2))) 
> ||
> 3426:               n->as_Reduction()->requires_strict_order())) ||
> 3427:             (Matcher::vector_element_basic_type(n->in(2)) == T_SHORT && 
> UseSVE > 0));

`UseSVE > 0` is a requirement for all cases. I suggest separate rule for 
`AddReductionVHF`. The predicate is much more complex now.

src/hotspot/cpu/aarch64/c2_MacroAssembler_aarch64.cpp line 1900:

> 1898:           fmulh(dst, dst, vtmp);
> 1899:           ins(vtmp, H, vsrc, 0, 7);
> 1900:           fmulh(dst, dst, vtmp);

Do you know why the performance is not improved significantly for multiply 
reduction? Seems instructions between different `ins` instructions will have a 
data-dependence, which is not expected? Could you please use other instructions 
instead of clear the register `vtmp` before `ins` and check the performance 
changes. 

Note that a clear of `mov` such as `MOVI Vd.2D, #0` has zero cost from V2's 
guide.

-------------

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27526#discussion_r2386942508
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27526#discussion_r2386995748
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/27526#discussion_r2387053858

Reply via email to