Hi Richard, Did you have a chance to look at this?
Thanks. Yuri. 2015-11-13 13:35 GMT+03:00 Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrum...@gmail.com>: > Hi Richard, > > Here is updated version of the patch which 91) is in sync with trunk > compiler and (2) contains simple cost model to estimate profitability > of scalar epilogue elimination. The part related to vectorization of > loops with small trip count is in process of developing. Note that > implemented cost model was not tuned well for HASWELL and KNL but we > got ~6% speed-up on 436.cactusADM from spec2006 suite for HASWELL. > > 2015-11-10 17:52 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com>: >> On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:02 PM, Ilya Enkovich <enkovich....@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> 2015-11-10 15:30 GMT+03:00 Richard Biener <richard.guent...@gmail.com>: >>>> On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Yuri Rumyantsev <ysrum...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Richard, >>>>> >>>>> It looks like misunderstanding - we assume that for GCCv6 the simple >>>>> scheme of remainder will be used through introducing new IV : >>>>> https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2015-09/msg01435.html >>>>> >>>>> Is it true or we missed something? >>>> >>>> <quote> >>>>> > Do you have an idea how "masking" is better be organized to be usable >>>>> > for both 4b and 4c? >>>>> >>>>> Do 2a ... >>>> Okay. >>>> </quote> >>> >>> 2a was 'transform already vectorized loop as a separate >>> post-processing'. Isn't it what this prototype patch implements? >>> Current version only masks loop body which is in practice applicable >>> for AVX-512 only in the most cases. With AVX-512 it's easier to see >>> how profitable masking might be and it is a main target for the first >>> masking version. Extending it to prologues/epilogues and thus making >>> it more profitable for other targets is the next step and is out of >>> the scope of this patch. >> >> Ok, technically the prototype transforms the already vectorized loop. >> Of course I meant the vectorized loop be copied, masked and that >> result used as epilogue... >> >> I'll queue a more detailed look into the patch for this week. >> >> Did you perform any measurements with this patch like # of >> masked epilogues in SPEC 2006 FP (and any speedup?) >> >> Thanks, >> Richard. >> >>> Thanks, >>> Ilya >>> >>>> >>>> Richard. >>>>
