On Mon, 17 Apr 2023 11:36:51 PDT (-0700), colli...@rivosinc.com wrote:
This series of patches adds foundational support for RISC-V auto-vectorization
support. These patches are based on the current upstream rvv vector intrinsic
support and is not a new implementation. Most of the implementation consists of
adding the new vector cost model, the autovectorization patterns themselves and
target hooks. This implementation only provides support for integer addition
and subtraction as a proof of concept. This patch set should not be construed
to be feature complete. Based on conversations with the community these patches
are intended to lay the groundwork for feature completion and collaboration
within the RISC-V community.
These patches are largely based off the work of Juzhe Zhong
(juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai<mailto:juzhe.zh...@rivai.ai>) of RiVAI. More specifically the
rvv-next branch at: https://github.com/riscv-collab/riscv-gcc.git
<https://github.com/riscv-collab/riscv-gcc.git>is the foundation of this patch set.
As discussed on this list, if these patches are approved they will be merged into a
"auto-vectorization" branch once gcc-13 branches for release. There are two
known issues related to crashes (assert failures) associated with tree vectorization; one
of which I have sent a patch for and have received feedback.
Changes in v4:
- Added support for binary integer operations and test cases
- Fixed bug to support 8-bit integer vectorization
- Fixed several assert errors related to non-multiple of two vector modes
Changes in v3:
- Removed the cost model and cost hooks based on feedback from Richard Biener
- Used RVV_VUNDEF macro to fix failing patterns
Changes in v2
- Updated ChangeLog entry to include RiVAI contributions
- Fixed ChangeLog email formatting
- Fixed gnu formatting issues in the code
Kevin Lee (2):
This patch adds a guard for VNx1 vectors that are present in ports
like riscv.
This patch supports 8 bit auto-vectorization in riscv.
Michael Collison (8):
RISC-V: Add new predicates and function prototypes
RISC-V: autovec: Export policy functions to global scope
RISC-V:autovec: Add auto-vectorization support functions
RISC-V:autovec: Add target vectorization hooks
RISC-V:autovec: Add autovectorization patterns for binary integer
operations
RISC-V:autovec: Add autovectorization tests for add & sub
vect: Verify that GET_MODE_NUNITS is a multiple of 2.
RISC-V:autovec: Add autovectorization tests for binary integer
gcc/config/riscv/predicates.md | 13 ++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h | 40 ++++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-protos.h | 14 ++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-v.cc | 176 ++++++++++++++++++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vector-builtins.cc | 4 +-
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-vector-builtins.h | 3 +
gcc/config/riscv/riscv.cc | 157 ++++++++++++++++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv.md | 1 +
gcc/config/riscv/riscv.opt | 20 ++
gcc/config/riscv/vector-auto.md | 79 ++++++++
gcc/config/riscv/vector-iterators.md | 2 +
gcc/config/riscv/vector.md | 4 +-
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-add-rv32.c | 25 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-add.c | 25 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-and-rv32.c | 25 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-and.c | 25 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-div-rv32.c | 27 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-div.c | 27 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-max-rv32.c | 26 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-max.c | 26 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-min-rv32.c | 26 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-min.c | 26 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-mod-rv32.c | 27 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-mod.c | 27 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-mul-rv32.c | 25 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-mul.c | 25 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-or-rv32.c | 25 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-or.c | 25 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-sub-rv32.c | 25 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-sub.c | 25 +++
.../riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-xor-rv32.c | 25 +++
.../gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-xor.c | 25 +++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/rvv.exp | 3 +
gcc/tree-vect-data-refs.cc | 2 +
gcc/tree-vect-slp.cc | 7 +-
35 files changed, 1031 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 gcc/config/riscv/vector-auto.md
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-add-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-add.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-and-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-and.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-div-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-div.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-max-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-max.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-min-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-min.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-mod-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-mod.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-mul-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-mul.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-or-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-or.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-sub-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-sub.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-xor-rv32.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/rvv/autovec/loop-xor.c
Thanks for re-spinning these. I haven't looked at the actual code yet,
but I think there's still a bigger question as to which way we go here:
Juzhe has talked about wanting to make some larger changes, but as per
some IRC discussions at least the type widening (and possible some of
the other bigger generic changes) aren't suitable for trunk yet as we're
still waiting for the test failures to calm down.
So I think that leaves us with the option of either taking something
like this now, or waiting. I'd prefer to just get things committed to
trunk so we can all work in the same place, but happy to hear if other
folks have comments.
I certainly don't intend on committing any of this until it's at least
reviewed and folks are OK with the approach. There's still some
testsuite failures to track down for 13 so no big rush on actually
committing things, but a bunch of folks are spinning up on autovec now
so I'd at least like to get agreement as to which direction we're headed
sooner rather than later.
